ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES - Plan...

ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIESKAUA‘I GENERAL PLAN UPDATE

PREPARED BY: SSFM INTERNATIONAL, INC.

501 SUMNER STREET, SUITE 620 | HONOLULU, HI 96817

FINAL

SEPTEMBER 2015

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PURPOSE AND HOW TO USE THIS PAPER

GLOSSARY OF HAWAIIAN WORDS AND PHRASES

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 KAUA‘I KĀKOU: SUSTAINABILITY, STEWARDSHIP, AND RESILIENCE ....................................................... 3

3.0 GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE .......................................................................................... 9

4.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................................. 19

5.0 AGRICULTURAL LANDS ..................................................................................................................... 25

6.0 TOURISM ......................................................................................................................................... 31

7.0 OPEN SPACE ..................................................................................................................................... 35

8.0 AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING ....................................................................................... 39

9.0 NATURAL HAZARDS AND CLIMATE CHANGE ..................................................................................... 45

10.0 INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES ....................................................................................... 55

11.0 MULTIMODAL LAND TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................... 67

12.0 ENERGY ......................................................................................................................................... 73

13.0 COMMUNITY HEALTH .................................................................................................................... 79

14.0 CULTURAL AND HERITAGE RESOURCES ........................................................................................... 85

15.0 NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION ............................................................ 89

16.0 PARKS AND RECREATION ................................................................................................................ 99

17.0 GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AND FISCAL MANAGEMENT ............................................................ 103

18.0 OVERARCHING THEMES ............................................................................................................... 107

PURPOSE AND HOW TO USE THIS PAPER

This Issues and Opportuni es Paper is prepared under Phase 2 of the contract to update the Kaua‘i General Plan (GP). This issue paper was prepared by SSFM Interna onal, Inc. under the guidance of the County of Kaua‘i Planning Department. This paper incorporates data and informa on contained in the following technical reports prepared for the GP update:

• PBR Hawai‘i & Associates, Inc. May 2015. Final Land Use Buildout Analysis. • County of Kaua‘i Important Agriculture Land Study. December 2014. • University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program. June 2014. Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal

Hazard Assessment. • County of Kaua‘i Built Environment Task Force. February 2015. Evalua on of Public Health

Policies in the General Plan 2000. • SMS Research & Marke ng Services, Inc. February 2014. Kaua‘i General Plan Update:

Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts. • R.M. Towill, 2015. General Plan Update Kaua‘i Infrastructure Analysis. • Kaua‘i Community Health Needs Assessment. July 2013. • Kaua‘i Community Health Improvement Plan. June 2014. • County of Kaua‘i, Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study (Dra ). Group 70

Interna onal. August 2014.

Many other plans and documents were analyzed for the purpose of this paper. Such plans are listed in the “Resources” sec on within each topic area.

The Issues and Opportuni es Paper addresses the key policy areas that fall within the scope of the Kaua‘i General Plan. Its purpose is to iden fy overarching themes, issues, and opportuni es under each policy topic to inform the planning and public engagement process.

The “Document Change Control Chart” below will track changes from dra to final versions. The issues and opportuni es will be carried forth into the community engagement process for further ve ng and discussion.

DOCUMENT CHANGE CONTROL CHART

Date Version # Author(s) Revision Descrip on

May 12, 2015 1.0 SSFM Interna onal First Dra

July 14, 2015 2.0 SSFM Interna onal Incorporated comments provided by the County Planning Department on June 22, 2015

August 27, 2015

3.0 SSFM Interna onal Incorporated comments provided by the County Planning Department on August 17, 2015

September 10, 2015

FINAL SSFM Interna onal Incorporated final revisions provided by the County Planning Department on September 7, 2015

GLOSSARY OF HAWAIIAN WORDS AND PHRASES The following list provides Hawaiian words and phrases, and their corresponding defini ons, used throughout this document. The transla ons are borrowed, and adapted as necessary, from Ulukau, the Hawaiian Electronic Library, available online at h p://wehewehe.org/.

Ahupua‘a – Land division usually extending from the uplands to the sea, so called because the boundary was marked by a heap (ahu) of stones surmounted by an image of a pig (Puaʻa), or because a pig or other tribute was laid on the altar as tax to the Chief

Aloha – affec on, compassion for others

Kākou – we (inclusive, three or more), ours, promotes synergy when developing solu ons and alterna ves

Keiki – child/children

Kuleana – right, privilege, concern, responsibility

Kūpuna – elders

Lōkahi – collabora on or teamwork, unity, agreement

Mālama ʻāina – to care for the land, stewardship of the land

Mālama pono – taking care

Pali - cliff

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS The following list provides the acronyms, abbrevia ons, and their corresponding defini ons used throughout this document and is forma ed in alphabe cal order.

ADA Americans with Disabili es Act

ADC Agribusiness Development Corpora on

AMI Area Median Income

B&B’s Bed & Breakfast

CEDS Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy

CAC Community Advisory Commi ee

CHII Community Health Improvement Ini a ve

CHNA Community Health Needs Assessment

CIP Capital Improvement Program

CNG Compressed Natural Gas

CWRM Commission on Water Resource Management

CZM Coastal Zone Management

CZO Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance

DBEDT Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism

DHHL Department of Hawaiian Home Lands

DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources

DOFAW Division of Forestry and Wildlife

DOH Department of Health

DOW Department of Water

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

ENSO El Nino Southern Oscilla on

EPA Environmental Protec on Agency

EPAC Energy Plan Advisory Commi ee

GIS Geographic Informa on System

GMO Gene cally Modified Organisms

GET General Excise Tax

GP General Plan

gpd Gallons Per Day

gwh Gigawa Hour

THE Housing, Transporta on, Electricity

IAL Important Agricultural Lands

ICAC Interagency Climate Adapta on Commi ee

ICAP Island Climate Adapta on Policy

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

ISWMP Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan

ITS Intelligent Transporta on System

IWS Individual Wastewater Systems

KEDB Kaua‘i Economic Development Board

KESRP Kaua‘i Endangered Seabird Recovery Project

KESP Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan

KISC Kaua‘i Invasive Species Commi ee

KIUC Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve

KPAA Kaua‘i Planning and Ac on Alliance

KWA Kaua‘i Watershed Alliance

LRTP Long Range Transporta on Plan

MGD Million Gallons per Day

MLTP Kaua‘i Mul modal Land Transporta on Plan

NAICS North American Industry Classifica on System

NOAA Na onal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra on

NETS Na onal Establishment Time Series

PDR Purchase of Development Rights

PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle

SHPD State Historic Preserva on Division

SLR Sea Level Rise

SMA Special Management Area

SPA Special Planning Areas

SVO Straight Vegetable Oil

TDR Transfer of Development Rights

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

VDA Visitor Des na on Areas

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

KAUA‘I COUNTY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES

JULY 2015 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION This Issues and Opportuni es Paper addresses the following policy areas outlined in the contract for the Update of the Kaua‘i General Plan, which is the guiding policy document for the County that describes the vision and policy guidance for Kaua‘i over the next 20 years. Each of these topics will be addressed in the public engagement process and in the resul ng General Plan:

1) Kauaʻi Kākou 2) Growth Management and Land Use 3) Economic Development 4) Agricultural Lands 5) Tourism 6) Open Space 7) Affordable and Workforce Housing 8) Climate Change and Natural Hazards 9) Infrastructure and Public Services 10) Mul modal Land Transporta on 11) Energy 12) Public Health 13) Cultural and Heritage Resources 14) Natural Resource Management and Conserva on 15) Parks and Recrea on 16) Government Opera ons and Fiscal Management

For each policy area, this paper addresses the following ques ons:

• What are the primary issues? • What opportuni es exist for the General Plan to address these issues? • How was this topic addressed in the 2000 General Plan? • What are the implica ons for the General Plan planning process? • What exis ng plans and policy documents address this topic?

“Issues” may take the form of gaps in exis ng policies or plans, condi ons that pose a challenge to the General Plan vision, or ma ers that impact a variety of topics in complex ways.

“Opportuni es” are the strengths that Kaua‘i has to build upon, and that may help in resolving “Issues.” These may include physical assets; community capital; or poten al access to new technologies, design, or resources.

“How this Topic was Addressed in the 2000 General Plan” describes how the topic was included and organized; whether the topic requires upda ng or is mostly intact; whether there is sufficient data available to dra the Chapter, and if not, where or how that informa on will be generated.

“Implica ons for the Planning Process” are those areas that the General Plan may seek to address within its scope. It includes an iden fica on of gaps in available informa on and needs in order to address the topic in the GP update.

“Resources” reference exis ng plans and policy documents consulted on each topic.

Key overarching themes that were iden fied based on the literature review of the technical papers are described in Chapter 18, and related back to the sixteen topics in the GP contract.


JULY 2015 2



JULY 2015 3

2.0 KAUA‘I KĀKOU: SUSTAINABILITY, STEWARDSHIP, AND RESILIENCE 2.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Sustainability, stewardship of the environment, food self-sufficiency, and community resilience were the most prominent themes that emerged from the early stages of the community engagement process for the General Plan Update. For the purposes of this discussion, sustainability, food self-sufficiency, stewardship, and resilience are corollaries that fit together under the unifying theme of the General Plan Update: Kaua‘i Kākou. Each is discussed in turn below.

Sustainability

The most important issue that Kaua‘i residents iden fied during the GP Update process can be encapsulated in the term “sustainability.”

Some models of sustainability posit that environmental, economic, and social well-being represent three equal legs of a stool, and that without one, the others cannot stand on their own. It was found during the community mee ngs for the GP Update that this model does not adequately capture Kaua’i’s vision of sustainability. Rather, what was repeatedly men oned was that the natural environment forms the all-important basis for social and economic well-being, to create a nested rela onship (see diagram at right). Care for and access to public trust resources (water, beaches, coastal areas, special places) is a par cular theme. Residents recognize that a sustainable economy requires increased self-reliance for food and energy and other basic resources. This means each individual taking the responsibility to reduce their ecological footprint in their own lifestyle and land use. It means making water use sustainable, and environmental protec on effec ve. It means dealing with wastewater and solid waste issues and seeking to reduce, recycle and reuse. Hawaiian concepts of kuleana (responsibility by all), malama pono (taking care), and aloha (affec on, compassion for others) add further meaning to the “triple bo om line” of environmental, societal, and economic well-being.

Sustainable development requires a commitment to social equity. This includes the fair distribu on of, and access to, resources. Economic well-being begins with the individuals in a society being able to thrive, that is, it depends on safe and secure housing, and access to educa on and healthcare as well as to employment. As discussed in the Housing, Transporta on, and Economic Development sec ons that follow later in this document, Kaua‘i faces significant challenges in realizing these goals. These include: The environment provides the founda on for

sustainable community, which supports a sustainable economy.

Nature

Society

Economy


JULY 2015 4

• Lack of sufficient funding for infrastructure, community development and affordable housing

• Popula on growth and development sprawl • Communi es designed for car travel • Inadequate bike and pedestrian facili es to make these realis c alterna ves to driving • High cost of living, especially the combined costs of housing, transportation and electricity • Inflated land values

Environmental Stewardship

Kaua‘i’s natural environment is broadly recognized as its greatest asset, the source of the scenic beauty, fer le land, and rainfall that has earned Kaua‘i its moniker as “The Garden Island.” The concepts of malama ‘āina and ahupua‘a management are invoked as principles of proper environmental stewardship for the island. Yet, natural and biological resources are challenged by various forces including climate change, private interests, pollu on, runoff, habitat altera on, and introduced and invasive species, overuse, among many others. Many organiza ons on Kaua‘i are working toward preserving and restoring na ve habitats, protec ng and stewarding water resources, and maintaining coastal areas. There are opportuni es for the GP Update to include recommenda ons that harness and build upon these efforts.

Food Self-Sufficiency

Food self-sufficiency is a priority that has been iden fied in State and County level plans and policies, including the Kaua‘i Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2010), and the Aloha+ Challenge (2014). Hawaii used to be an exporter of agricultural products, but now over 85 - 90% of food consumed locally is imported (Hollier, 2015; Leunga and Lokeb, 2008).

Based on a current popula on of approximately 70,000 people, about 21,158 acres of land in food produc on would be required to a ain food self-sufficiency (Dra Important Agricultural Lands Study, 2014). Thirty-nine percent or 53,547 acres of Kaua‘i’s lands meet all the criteria of Act 183 (SLH 2008; HRS §205-41) Important Agricultural Lands. Suitable agricultural lands include those that:

• are capable of producing sustained high yields when treated and managed according to accepted farming methods and technology;

• contribute to the State’s economic base and produce agricultural commodi es for export or local consump on; and

• are needed to promote the expansion of agricultural ac vi es and income for the future, even if currently not in produc on.

Kaua‘i has enough suitable agricultural lands to meet its needs. How to incen vize farmers to u lize these lands to serve the local market is a considera on in reaching the ambi ous goals for local food produc on set forth in the Aloha+ Challenge.

Community Resilience

Kaua‘i’s residents value independence and self-sufficiency, and have many community-oriented interests that bind them together. Regardless of where they came from or when they arrived, they come to appreciate Kaua‘i’s history and understand how it remains relevant in the 21st century. Hurricanes ‘Iwa and ‘Iniki loom large in the collec ve consciousness of the island, and there is an acute awareness that island residents need to con nue to band together to protect what is most important and plan for future changes, whether environmental, social, or economic. This collec ve spirit is reflected in the words of


JULY 2015 5

‘Ōlelo No‘eau 327: E lauhoe mai na wa‘a, i ke kā, i ka hoe; i ka hoe, i ke kā; pae aku i ka ‘āina… Everybody paddle the canoes together; bail and paddle, paddle and bail, and the shore is reached.

This sen ment con nues to reveal itself today in both individual and collec ve decisions that emanate from Kaua‘i and the overall commitment toward living in a more sustainable and self-sufficient manner. On Kaua‘i, people take personal responsibility for the well-being of themselves and their extended family. Neighbors work together to ensure the safety of the streets they live on and collec vely watch over neighborhood children. Food is grown in backyards and the ahupua‘a con nue to be harvested for the meat, fish, and fruits that keep families well-fed and healthy. Ci zens join local organiza ons which, in turn, work with the public and private sectors to collec vely make decisions for the well-being of all.

And yet, the people of Kaua‘i have the humility to know, first, that they can’t do everything themselves – there are mes when outside assistance is desirable and necessary – and second, that their lifestyles impact resources both on the island and elsewhere. Thus, reconciling self-sufficiency with necessary outside connec ons remains a regular topic of discussion.

Summary of Key Issues

To summarize, the major issues in Sustainability, Stewardship, and Resilience include:

• How independence, self-sufficiency, and personal responsibility guide collec ve well-being. This means each individual taking the responsibility to reduce their ecological footprint in their own lifestyle and land use, and contribu ng to ones’ community.

• How to foster a shared kuleana (responsibility by all) for planning for the future, preparing for future changes, and providing for the needs of people from keiki (children) to kupuna (elders)

• How Kaua‘i can implement a model of environmental protec on using principles of ahupua‘a and malama ‘āina as the basis for sustainable society, and in turn, sustainable economy.

• Ensuring Kaua‘i’s communi es, infrastructure, businesses, and towns are resilient in the face of natural, economic and social challenges are a vital component for sustainability.

Kaua‘i’s independence and pride can be traced back in history … During the reign of King Kamehameha, the islands of Kaua‘i and Niʻihau were the last Hawaiian Islands to join his Kingdom of Hawai’i. Their ruler, Kaumuali’i, resisted Kamehameha for years. King Kamehameha twice prepared a huge armada of ships and canoes to take the islands by force, and twice failed- once due to a storm, and once due to an epidemic.


JULY 2015 6

2.2 OPPORTUNITIES

The 2050 Hawai‘i Sustainability Plan defines sustainability for Hawai‘i as follows: 1. Respects the culture, character, beauty and history of our state’s island communi es; 2. Strikes a balance between economic, social and community, and environmental priori es; and, 3. Meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future genera ons to meet their own needs.

While some suggest that there is compe ve tension between the environment, economy and social equity, an alterna ve perspec ve has them suppor ng and strengthening one another. For example, improving the environment will strengthen the economy, and more equitable social programs will result a stronger workforce. Finding the balance between the factors, or so-called “triple bo om line”, can be achieved through shared governance, or having the public sector, private sector and ci zen-led groups and organiza ons ac vely par cipate in decisions that impact everybody. Luckily, this collabora ve spirit already exists in Kaua‘i and is a strength to build upon for the purposes of the GP.

Another recurring theme involves the island’s exis ng limits to growth and what growth can be accommodated. Exis ng condi ons that serve to limit growth on Kaua‘i include: limited availability of Urban designated lands; high construc on costs; State and County en tlement processes; as well as macroeconomic forces that affect supply and demand. The General Plan Update will need to iden fy growth policies, and the implemen ng ac ons that will encourage sustainable growth that is in keeping with given the values of environmental protec on, social equity, infrastructure, and a sustainable economy.

In 2014, the Mayors of each County in Hawai‘i and community partners signed the Aloha+ Challenge (subsequently endorsed by the State Legislature with resolu on SCR69 SD1), which outlines six targets for sustainability to be achieved by 2030. These are listed in the text box at right. The legisla on calls for expanded partnerships between government agencies, non-profit organiza ons, the private sector and local communi es to promote coordinated and integrated ac on. Coun es are required to review and report progress annually. The commitments and recommenda ons in the Aloha+ Challenge can provide a valuable framework for iden fying priori es and tracking progress on sustainability, stewardship, and resilience.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Kauaʻi Kākou include:

Aloha+ Challenge 2030 Targets for Sustainability

1. Clean Energy: 70 percent clean energy – 40 percent from renewables and 30 percent from efficiency.

2. Local Food: At least double local food produc on – 20 to 30 percent of food consumed is grown locally.

3. Natural Resource Management: Reverse the trend of natural resource loss mauka to makai by increasing freshwater security, watershed protec on, community---based marine management, invasive species control and na ve species restora on.

4. Waste Reduc on: Reduce the solid waste stream prior to disposal by 70 percent through source reduc on, recycling, bioconversion, and landfill diversion methods.

5. Smart Sustainable Communi es: Increase livability and resilience in the built environment through planning and implementa on at state and county levels.

6. Green Workforce & Educa on: Increase local green jobs and educa on to implement these targets.

The Aloha+ Challenge: A Culture of Sustainability, July 7, 2014


JULY 2015 7

• There are opportuni es to work together with the many non-governmental organiza ons on Kaua‘i that are dedicated to environmental protec on, social equity, and economic well-being toward innova ve and balanced solu ons to community concerns.

• The 2050 Hawaii Sustainability Plan and Aloha+ Challenge serve as a framework for policy and ac on.

2.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED KAUA‘I KĀKOU

• The theme of Kaua‘i’s residents working together to achieve greater sustainability and stewardship are implicit, but not explicit, in the 2000 GP.

• Implementa on of responsibili es were primarily with the public sector. The private sector’s responsibility in implementa on is not discussed in detail.

• The 2000 GP addresses environmental well-being and economic well-being in more detail than it does social equity. Discussion regarding trade-offs is limited.

2.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROCESS

Work on Kaua’i Kākou to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) U lize the Aloha+ Challenge targets as a framework for how Kaua‘i’s environmental resources are sustained, for example: the upper watershed areas which face degrada on, floral and faunal biodiversity, riparian and aqua c resources, as well as broader topics such as greenhouse gas emissions reduc on and the Kauaʻi Energy Sustainability Plan goals.

2) Address economic well-being, in part, by sustaining tourism while crea ng opportuni es to diversify the economy.

3) The concept of food sustainability needs to be ar culated. 4) The GP chapters on health and housing will iden fy the disadvantaged sec ons of the popula on,

but more informa on will needed to assess social equity. 5) Iden fy poten al public-private partnerships, and opportuni es for interdepartmental

collabora on in implemen ng GP ac ons.

2.5 RESOURCES

Aloha+ Challenge Declara on. Signed by all County Mayors & Governor Neil Abercrombie on July 7, 2014.

Hollier, Dennis, Hawai’i Business Magazine. November 2014. Can Hawai’i Feed Itself? Retrieved on February, 2015. From h p://www.Hawaiibusiness.com/can-Hawaii-feed-itself/

Leunga, PingSun and M. Lokeb. December 2008. Economic Impacts of Increasing Hawai‘i’s Food Self-Sufficiency. CTAHR Department of Molecular Biosciences and Bioengineering and Hawai’i Department of Agriculture.

State of Hawai’i. December 2014. Aloha+ Challenge: Recommenda ons for Taking Ac on and Tracking Progress.

State of Hawai’i Sustainable Task Force. January 2008. Hawai’i 2050 Sustainability Plan: Char ng a Course for Hawai’i’s Sustainable Future.

Social Sciences Public Policy Center, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa. January 2010. Hawai’i 2050 Update: Report in Response to Act 225, 2008 Session Laws of Hawai‘i Rela ng to Sustainability.


JULY 2015 8



JULY 2015 9

3.0 GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE 3.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

The total popula on for the County of Kaua‘i is projected to increase from 67,091 in 2013 to 88,013 in 2035, according to the SMS Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts (2014) study prepared for the GP Update. That represents a total growth of 31.2% between 2010 and 2035, or about 1.10% per year. Over the past 15 years, natural increase and migra on have equally contributed to popula on growth. The great majority of popula on growth is planned to occur in the Līhu‘e and Kōloa-Po‘ipū-Kalāheo regions. Ac on to address this are reflected in the recently updated Community Plans for both Districts.

POPULATION PROJECTIONS BY DISTRICT (1990-2035)

PLANNING DISTRICT 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2035 County of Kaua‘i 51,67

6 58,463 67,091 74,693 83,328 88,013

Līhu‘e 11,169

12,507 14,683 18,017 21,595 23,456

Kōloa-Po‘ipū -Kalāheo 9,600 10,545 11,696 13,623 15,737 16,855Hanapēpē - ‘Ele‘ele 3,873 4,362 6,157 6,463 6,860 7,094Waimea 4,698 5,660 5,561 5,901 6,323 6,566Hanalei (North Shore) 5,913 6,605 8,002 8,286 8,686 8,933Kawaihau - Kapa‘a (East Kaua‘i)

16,192

18,784 20,992 22,403 24,128 25,110

Source: SMS Research Kaua‘i General Plan Update: Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts (February 2014)

Exis ng County General Plan land use designa ons consist of Open, Agriculture, Park, Residen al, Resort, Urban Center, and special designa ons for Transporta on and Military. The Open District comprises over 70% of the island, followed by nearly 20% in the Agricultural District. The propor on of the other designa ons are Residen al (3%), Urban Center (1%), Resort (1%), Military (1%), Park (<1%), and Transporta on (<1%).

Residen al Lands

According to the 2015 Land Use Buildout Analysis Technical Report, if all exis ng and projected residen al dwellings were located en rely on Residen al-zoned parcels, the supply of exis ng Residen al-zoned parcels cannot accommodate the en re 2035 projected popula on. This is conserva ve, as it does not factor in allowable residen al uses on exis ng Agriculture and Open zoned parcels. An analysis of vacant residen al-zoned parcels indicates that these lands come close to accommoda ng the 2035 popula on, with possible shortages in the Līhu‘e and East Kaua‘i Districts. The


JULY 2015 10

analysis notes that deficiencies could be made up through higher density mixed use areas in exis ng town centers.

The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan prepared by the Kaua‘i Housing Agency suggests that more residen al lands that can support low-income housing could be needed. According to the 2014 Homeless U liza on Report, Kaua‘i’s homeless popula ons are as follows: 39% or 248 individuals are newly homeless, and of the 248 total, 200 individuals are recently homeless. Also, Kauaʻi has another 125 individuals who are chronically homeless. Perhaps even more disturbing is the data from the 2011 Hawai‘i Housing Planning Study (prepared by SMS for the Hawai‘i Housing Finance and Development Corpora on) that suggests that 36% of total households on Kauaʻi are at-risk for homelessness as a result of factors that include high housing costs and low wages. Another key indicator of housing needs involves overcrowding. A er the burden of cost, the most common housing problem is severely overcrowded condi ons (>1.51 people per room), with overcrowding concentrated among extremely-low and very-low income households (based on annually updated HUD income categories). Overcrowding is a result of both housing supply and affordability. Increasing the supply of homes can result in lowering housing costs. At the same me, residents are concerned that new housing supply will simply increase housing op ons for the off-island market and not serve exis ng at-need households.

The 2015 Land Use Buildout Analysis conducted for the GP planning process examined two growth scenarios for the island - directed growth and status quo - and then factored in the SMS socioeconomic projec ons, by Planning Districts.

The “status quo” scenario assumes that growth will follow where residents presently live or the most affordable lands. Based on building permit data over 15 years (1995-2009), most new residen al ac vity occurred in the North Shore, East Kaua‘i, and South Kaua‘i. The ac vity seemed to sprawl into the Agriculture and Open districts (combined 39%) and lower density residen al districts of R-4 and R-2 (combined 29%). Only 17% occurred in the R-6 medium density zoning district, and less than 1% in mul -family zoning districts (e.g., R-15, R-20). If future growth occurs in the vicinity of exis ng development and on the most affordable lands (lowest assessed values), the status quo scenario is that 25% of the 2035 dwelling units would be in the Agriculture zoning district, 8% in the Open district, and the balance of 67% in the Residen al districts.

The “Directed Growth” scenario assumes that future growth beyond the exis ng popula on will be encouraged in the Urban Centers, Town Centers, Residen al-zoned land, and Ag Homestead areas, thereby leaving undeveloped as much agriculture and open zoned lands as possible.

The districts most impacted by the differing growth policies would be Līhu'e and the North Shore. Līhu'e, as the major Urban Center, would receive a significant propor on of the future growth under the Directed Growth Scenario, that is: focusing development on exis ng urban district lands and redevelopment at higher densi es in Town Centers. Conversely, the agriculture and open zoning districts of the North Shore would receive more growth than projected by the SMS Study under the Status Quo Scenario, and significantly less growth under the Directed Growth Scenario. Kapa’a-Wailuā would receive growth comparable to the SMS projec on under the Status Quo Scenario and less growth under the Directed Growth Scenario. The South Shore would receive growth comparable to the SMS projec on under the Directed Growth Scenario and more growth under the Status Quo Scenario. The differences between the scenarios were negligible for both Hanapēpē-Ele’ele and Waimea-Kekaha. The County has already begun to implement the elements of the Directed Growth scenario to accomplish specific land use goals by way of the Līhu'e and South Kauaʻi Community Plans.


JULY 2015 11

ALTERNATE GROWTH SCENARIOS BY PLANNING DISTRICT

Source: Kauaʻi County General Plan Technical Study: Land Use Buildout Analysis, PBR Hawai‘i 2015

Contribu ons to projected housing needs will also come from lands that are currently en tled or planned for development. According to County Planning Department records, projects that are par ally or currently en tled for future development could add nearly 6,000 housing units to the Island during the GP Update’s planning horizon. These projects are at various stages of approvals, land use re-designa ons, and construc on, and are shown in the table on the following page.


JULY 2015 12

ENTITLED RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS BY DISTRICT

District Project Name Housing Units

East Kaua’i Piilani Mai He Kai (DHHL Anahola) 181

Kulana 172

Kapaa Highlands, Phase 2 769

TOTAL 1,122

Eleele A&B Eleele Residential 201

Lima Ola (Affordable) 450

TOTAL 651

Lihue DHHL Wailua, Phase 1 188

Kohea Loa - D.R. Horton 444

Pikake Subdivision 146

Grove Farm Wailani Residential 1,450

Koamalu 220

Waiola Phase I 47

Waiola Phase II 56

Waiola Phase II 93

TOTAL 2,644

North Shore Kolopua (Princeville Affordable) 44

TOTAL 44

South Kaua’i Brydeswood Ranch (A&B) 24

Koloa Creekside 72

Kukuiula Employee Housing 100

Kukuiula 750

The Village at Koloa Town 34

Koloa Camp - Waihononu 50

CIRI (CLDC) Subdivision 10

TOTAL 1,040

Waimea Kekaha lots 40

Kikiaola Mauka 270

Kikialoa - Field 14 56

TOTAL 366

ISLAND TOTAL 5,867

Source: Kauaʻi County Planning Department.


JULY 2015 13

Industrial Lands

Most (81%) of the island’s industrial lands are within the Līhu‘e District. That district is also home to the planned Ahukini Māka‘i development, which will provide an addi onal 146 acres (approximately 6.4 million square feet) of industrial lands near Līhu‘e airport. The new Industrial Designa on included in the South Kauaʻi Community Plan added another 160 acres around the Old Kōloa Mill site. While this amount of floor space theore cally meets the per capita need for industrial space as outlined in the 2015 Land Use Buildout, it is worth discussing whether the distribu on of industrial lands island-wide and their associated zoning designa ons can accommodate the range of desired industrial uses.

Commercial Lands

According to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO), "’Commercial Use’ means the purchase, sale or other transac on involving the handling or disposi on of any ar cle, substance or commodity for profit or a livelihood, including in addi on, public garages, office buildings, offices of doctors and other professionals, public stables, recrea onal and amusement enterprises conducted for profit, shops for the sale of personal services, places where commodi es or services are sold or are offered for sale, either by direct handling of merchandise or by agreements to furnish them but not including dumps and junk yards.” Commercial uses are permi ed in the General and Neighborhood Commercial zoning districts (C-G, C-N). Between 2015 and 2035, PBR projects a need for another 2,716,416 square feet of commercial space. Currently planned and en tled projects will contribute, as shown in the table below.

ENTITLED COMMERCIAL PROJECTS BY DISTRICT

District Project Name Commercial Square Footage

Koloa Koloa Rum Company Store and Café 9,000

TOTAL 9,000

Lihue Hokulei Village 222,000

Grove Farm Wailani Commercial 1,132,299

Weinberg Foundation Renovation 24,250

Kukui Grove Commercial Buildout 96,000

Weinberg Foundation/Ahukini 20,000

TOTAL 1,494,549

North Shore Kilauea Crossings 6,070

Kilauea Town Center 46,800

Hanalei Halelea Office 2,000

TOTAL 54,870

South Kaua’i Village at Koloa Town 96,000

Kukuiula ABC Store 21,000

Koloa Marketplace 76,000

Old Glass Warehouse 7,200

TOTAL 200,200

ISLAND TOTAL 1,758,619


JULY 2015 14

Resort Lands

The Land Use Buildout Analysis used the Hawaii Tourism Authority’s latest Visitor Plant Inventory (2012) to analyze resort lands. Kauaʻi County had 8,289 transient accommoda on units in 2012. This number includes 98 bed and breakfast units on 27 proper es. All Planning Districts have Visitor Des na on Areas (VDA), except Hanapēpē-‘Ele‘ele. The Planning District with the largest VDA in terms of acreage is South Kaua‘i, followed by North Shore, Līhu‘e, Kapa’a-Wailuā, and Waimea-Kekaha. In terms of units, South Kaua‘i ranks first, however, the order changes with Kapa’a-Wailuā second, followed by North Shore, then Līhu‘e. The needs of visitors are discussed in greater detail in the Tourism sec on of this Paper. The Buildout Analysis suggests that there is more than enough Resort zoned land to accommodate projected visitor growth.

Factoring in planned resort development, which amounts to approximately 4,500 new units (Source: Hawai’i Tourism Authority, 2013 (Planned Addi ons and New Development, Table 10)), all Planning Districts except the North Shore and Līhu‘e are projected to have an excess visitor unit supply. Waimea-Kekaha will have the most excess followed by Kapa‘a-Wailua and South Kaua‘i. The North Shore has an extensive supply of poten al single-family transient vaca on rentals within the VDA that could respond to market demand.

The Land Use Buildout Analysis notes that “even if projec ons indicate a current excess of Resort-zoned land, there may be other reasons on a case by case basis to rezone to Resort such as aging of the resort infrastructure, vagaries in the occupancy rate, unpredictable global economy, or shi s in visitor accommoda on preferences.”

To summarize, the major issues in Growth Management and Land Use include:

• The popula on is expected to grow by 31.2% between 2010 and 2035. • More land may be needed to accommodate residen al growth; and generate affordable housing. • Some growth will be needed in every district. The majority of the growth can be directed to

exis ng town centers. • Resort lands are adequate to meet demand. • Commercial and Industrial lands may be adequate in acreage, but distribu on may be an issue to

explore further.

3.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Kauaʻi currently uses a tradi onal model of zoning, i.e., one that segregates uses (commercial in one area, residen al in another, etc.). Given the desire to preserve open spaces and agricultural lands and maintain the sense of place afforded by communi es with dis nct town centers or main streets, other models have been reviewed. The County has both historic and exis ng experience implemen ng other types of zoning– from the Kapa‘a Special Planning Areas (SPAs) in the 1970s, to the Līhu'e Town Core Special Planning Areas, mixed use Special Planning Areas in the Līhu‘e Community Plan, and form-based code areas established in the South Kauaʻi Community Plan. An island-wide form-based zoning code that focuses on building size, type, and loca on, as opposed to uses, may serve Kaua‘i’s needs. “Smart Growth” concepts recognize that mixing uses (within buildings, and along streets) and dense living and working environments centered on func onal and a rac ve public spaces makes for be er living and a achment to place. A form-based code model is a natural extension of the exis ng mixed use districts and historic main street design. Form-based code, or a hybrid thereof, can include building and public space design components that preserve or improve community character and facilitates placemaking.


JULY 2015 15

Other growth management tools include:

• Planned unit development – gives developers incen ves to meet pre-determined land use goals (similar to CZO Ar cle 10 Project Development);

• Floa ng zones – permits special uses within a jurisdic on in accordance with development criteria;

• Overlay zoning – iden fies an area that requires more stringent regula ons (e.g., an aquifer, watershed, or scenic viewshed) in addi on to those regula ons governing underlying uses (similar to SPAs and Special Treatment Districts in the CZO);

• Bonus or incen ve zoning – provides developers with bonuses and incen ves to achieve increased development density;

• Mixed-use zoning – allows a wide array of types of development aimed at reducing distances between homes and jobs;

• Land banking – allows the outright purchase of land by the public sector well in advance of any development to ensure appropriate land uses;

• Transfer or Purchase of Development Rights (TDR or PDR) – allows landowners to get development value on other areas if current holdings are placed in conserva on or trust that limits development (TDR is also recommended in the 2014 Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment); and

• Zoning or Building permit alloca on – limits the number of zoning or building permits that are issued on an annual basis.

The Līhu‘e Community Plan (2015) is the first Planning District on Kaua‘i to recommend an Urban Edge Boundary to limit the extent of urban sprawl and delineate town edges. While the Plan drew such a boundary, it will require an ordinance to become implemented. The crea on of an Urban Edge Boundary can help limit urban sprawl. It defines where higher density urban development should be contained. Areas outside the Urban Edge Boundary are intended for lower density land uses such as open space, conserva on, and agriculture. Other planning areas may also benefit from an Urban Edge Boundary.

The GP planning process can set the groundwork for Community Plans to explore poten al “areas of change”, similar to those contained in the South Kaua‘i and Līhu‘e Community Plans. That is, areas that lend themselves to development or redevelopment. Some areas may require rezoning or changes to the State Land Use Classifica on, others may not because they are already zoned correctly. Infill development offers efficiencies in terms of proximity to exis ng infrastructure and can require fewer regulatory changes to zoning and land use designa ons. Iden fying place types that can provide opportuni es for infill development may be one of the GP’s top priori es.

The PBR’s 2015 Land Use Buildout Analysis suggests that if the island were allowed to build out to the full capacity allowed by zoning, significant growth would occur on lands in the agriculture and open zoning districts. In contrast, if redevelopment of the Urban and Town Centers were encouraged at higher densi es, as much as 40% of the dwelling units could be accommodated within those exis ng areas, with negligible residen al use of the agriculture and open zoning districts. As such, the General Plan might consider recommending more mixed use zoning or higher densi es in the “Urban Center” designa on in the General Plan and in town centers. The growth projec ons are modest, and aimed at the need to provide adequate workforce housing and sa sfy affordable housing needs.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Growth Management and Land Use include:

• The two recently completed Community Plans for Līhu‘e and South Kaua‘i set a direc on for how the directed growth policy can inform future growth on Kaua‘i.


JULY 2015 16

• Place typing can iden fy loca ons where growth should occur and with what regulatory mechanisms.

• Mixed-use zoning can respond to the need for residen al capacity and result in more vibrant and walkable town centers and be used to ensure new greenfield development creates walkable communi es with a diversity of housing types.

• Form-based codes can help guide the form of growth. • Growth recommenda ons in the GP should be based on the best available data and consider tools

such as Smart Growth and policies to balance growth with infrastructure needs.

3.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE

• “Growth Management and Land Use” is discussed in mul ple sec ons of the 2000 GP. Grouped under “Preserving Kaua‘i’s Rural Character” are discussions pertaining to agricultural lands, open lands, urban lands, and scenic roadway corridors. Individual communi es and opportuni es for “Enhancing Towns and Commercial Areas” are discussed in Chapter 6 “Enhancing Towns and Communi es and Providing for Growth”.

• The 2000 GP includes several policies that support more compact development; however, Implemen ng Ac on 4.6.3 pertaining to land supply exemplifies the pressure the County faces when trying to support both compact development and business entrepreneurs that have loca ons outside of town centers in mind, i.e., “The County shall strive for a balance between mee ng community shopping needs with new commercial development and suppor ng local small businesses in older business areas.” In accordance with Smart Growth principles (see also the goal of “compactness” in the Mul modal Plan), infill development can maintain the community character, makes use of exis ng infrastructure, and has a smaller impact on natural resources and the environment.

• The majority of policies that promote compact centers surrounded by open and green spaces have not changed, but the terminology has changed to emphasize smart growth, walkability and mul modal transporta on.

• Place-typing and form-based codes as a means to understand and preserve the best of Kaua‘i’s urban form are not men oned in the 2000 GP. The GP does recognize the need to preserve the historic fabric of exis ng communi es.

• Changes to the Open District were implemented, as a result of recommenda ons within the GP, to help protect natural resources and open spaces.

• The 2000 GP recommended revitalizing central Līhu'e and Kaua‘i's small town commercial areas by upgrading sewer and water facili es, increasing the amount of public parking, and improving streets and sidewalks. Completed improvements in commercial core areas include the Kūhi‘ō Highway Widening and Hardy Street (ongoing). Planning is underway for Rice Street; Po‘ipū Road in Kōloa and Po‘ipū; and, Hanapēpē Road. A parking audit was completed for the Līhu‘e Town Core.

• The 2000 GP recommended a collabora ve planning partnership among County agencies, community and business organiza ons, private en es, the State Highways Division to design highway and road improvements in a manner that supports commercial ac vity in Kaua‘i's business areas. This is an on-going task that is being implemented, for example with the County’s par cipa on in the Kaua'i Federal-Aid Highways Plan and DOT Kapa‘a Sub-Area Transporta on Solu ons Plan. Both these planning efforts had ci zen advisory commi ees. Design charre es and community design workshops were held for Poipu Road, Hanapēpē Road, Rice Street, and roadway sec ons for Kalaheo and Koloa as a part of the South Kaua‘i Community Plan.


JULY 2015 17

• As a means of protec ng Town centers, the 2000 GP recommended placing a high priority on deterring strip development and urban sprawl when making strategic decisions on new commercial zoning or recommenda ons to the State Highways Division on highway development. The Planning Department is responding to this task with a “Street Frontage” bill.

• The 2000 GP includes a series of policies associated enhancing towns and commercial areas. They involve tasks associated with improving town centers through sidewalks or unpaved pedestrian pathways along main roads, passive parks, redevelopment of historic structures without new setbacks/parking requirements, parking in rear of store, town center parking lots, town design standards. Mechanisms for implementa on include preparing amendments to the CZO providing design standards for commercial development in exis ng towns and new commercial projects. These efforts are underway.

• The 2000 GP recommended centralizing zoning regula ons in a single chapter, and directed the Planning Department to prepare an ordinance transferring to Chapter 8, the CZO, those provisions of Chapter 10, the Special Development Plans, that modify or affect the CZO, and to make other revisions to Chapter 8 as may be necessary. Although not completed, the South Kaua'i Community Plan's Form Based Code (Appendix C) sets up the framework for inser on as a sub-chapter of Chapter 8.


Work on growth management and land use to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) A growth policy can explain how the County’s projected growth is allocated to the planning districts and serve as the basis for managing growth through the remaining community plans (for Waimea-Kekaha, Hanapēpē-Eleele, East Kaua'i and North Shore). Growth scenarios and popula on projec ons should be based on the Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report. Table 1-1: Alterna ve Projec ons of Resident and Visitor Popula on on Kauaʻi 2020 from the 2000 GP can be updated with the discussion on pages 6 and 19-21 in the Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report. Table 1-2: Kaua’i 2020 Projec ons in the 2000 GP can be updated with Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report Tables 1 and 9.

2) Place typing will be integrated into the Kaua‘i General Plan Update, including the Land Use Map. Charre es will be held to: • Iden fy a tudes toward change & intensity of desired change • Assign Place Types with boundaries • Confirm and evolve district visions • Iden fy features of value and desired elements of form and character to preserve/encourage • Educate about the GP process, place typing and how it informs GP

3) The land use maps from South Kaua‘i and Līhu‘e will be incorporated into the General Plan largely as is. Any modifica ons will be geared toward achieving consistency in land use categories and terminology. Changes will not be substan ve. The GP has an opportunity to set guidelines for the use of consistent Land Use categoriza ons and to outline a process that can be followed for the remaining four Community Plan areas.

4) To account for planned or en tled developments that may result in addi onal place types or affect exis ng places, the County will conduct outreach to major landowners and request mee ngs with them to iden fy development plans over the GP horizon. This informa on may be factored into the charre e materials and discussion where appropriate. The County will also encourage landowners to a end the place typing charre es.


JULY 2015 18

5) The Land Use Buildout Analysis does not explicitly address planned or en tled development, except for resort areas. Mapping out en tled development will occur during the GP process to further the understanding of future residen al and commercial land use needs.

6) The GP Update will require an update to the General Plan Land Use Maps, with explana ons of which lands have been re-designated and a ra onale for the change.

7) Areas targeted for rezoning will need to be iden fied and discussed with the Planning Department, CAC and community. The 2015 Land Use Buildout Analysis Technical Report provides data with which to facilitate some of these discussions.

3.5 RESOURCES

PBR Hawai‘i & Associates, Inc. 2015. Land Use Buildout Analysis.

Industrial Lands Inventory [in process].

County of Kaua‘i. September, 2014. South Kaua‘i Form-Based Code.

County of Kaua‘i Planning Department. July 2015. South Kaua‘i Community Plan.

State of Hawai’i, Department of Land and Natural Resources. Commission on Water Resource Management. February 1990. Kaua‘i Water Use and Development Plan.

State of Hawai’i, 2011. Hawai‘i Housing Planning Study 2011.

SMS Research & Marke ng Services, Inc. February 2014. Kaua‘i General Plan Update: Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts.

County of Kaua‘i Planning Department. June 2015. Līhuʻe Community Plan.

Jung, Ian. April 30, 2015. Growth Management Issues for the General Plan Update.

County of Kauaʻi, Kauaʻi County Housing Agency. April 2015. Consolidated Plan 2015-2020.


JULY 2015 19

4.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Anchor Industries

The visitor industry and agricultural industry are the primary economic drivers on Kaua‘i. Approximately 30% of Kaua‘i’s jobs are in tourism and 4% are in agriculture. While this provides a backbone for the local economy, both agriculture and tourism can also be vulnerable to events and factors that cannot be controlled, including global economic forces, natural disasters, and climate change. Consequently, a main focus of economic development on Kaua‘i is diversifica on of industries (see vision at right). This has been approached through iden fica on of promising economic clusters, as described in the following sec on.

Promising Economic Clusters

In the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) for Kaua‘i (last updated in 2010), the Kauaʻi Economic Development Board and County of Kaua‘i Office of Economic Development iden fied six industry clusters in Kaua‘i that are “good investments” and that could strengthen tourism industry niche markets. An “industry cluster” is a group of related industries that share infrastructure, labor, customers, suppliers, or services. These industries o en face common opportuni es, challenges and threats. The clusters include: health and wellness; food and agriculture; culture and arts; sports and recrea on; science and technology; and, sustainable technologies and prac ces. The idea behind inves ng in specific cluster is to create jobs, replace imports, and generate more products for both export and local consump on.

Kaua‘i Economic Development Vision from the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2010)

Economy is strong, stable, and diversified.

While the visitor industry s ll provides the largest number of jobs, new businesses in agriculture, health and wellness, sustainable technologies & prac ces, art & culture, science & technology, and sports & recrea on provide an increasing propor on of total jobs.

There are many job opportuni es with higher wages.

Wages allow people to comfortably support their families.

Unemployment is low (3-5%).

Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve (KIUC) is robust and is a leader in promo ng energy conserva on and renewable energy.

We have decreased energy consump on and increased our use of renewable energy.

We have preserved Kaua‘i’s special environment and culture.

Locally-grown products are consumed locally and exported. We have become more food self-sufficient.


JULY 2015 20

The Office of Economic Development is implemen ng several projects from the CEDS aimed at suppor ng the industry clusters. More projects have been added over me, notably as part of the County’s Holo Holo 2020 Ini a ve. The 2010 CEDS is currently being updated, and its projec ons for popula on growth and employment, as well as the priority projects list, will reflect current trends and thinking.

For the GP Update, Collabora ve Economics, Inc. conducted a preliminary regional business using 2011 data from the Na onal Establishment Time Series (NETS) database. 1 The analysis iden fied growth opportunity clusters. These include industries in which Kaua‘i’s economy has a specializa on in rela on to the rest of the state and those which are export-oriented. Opportunity clusters help bring resources into the region from elsewhere and focus efforts on the sectors could help drive growth in the region. Opportunity clusters iden fied for Kaua‘i include:

• Sub-categories of tourism including: amusement and recrea on, visitor transporta on, personal care and beauty;

• Food processing and distribu on; • Defense; • Fashion and retail; • Makers (small-scale manufacturers); • Technical services (film and digital media, music, architecture, engineering and design); and, • Manufacturing (commercial prin ng, metal fabrica on, soap and detergent, po ery, hardware).

Iden fying opportunity clusters helps the County by informing investment and policy decisions.

Employment Trends

The chart and table on the following page show 2011 employment in Kaua‘i’s anchor industries and opportunity cluster areas.

The tourism cluster employed 30%, or 11,026, of Kaua‘i’s workforce in 2011 (Collabora ve Economics, 2015). The “rest of the economy” as labeled in the chart below employs 20% of the workforce and includes community services (e.g. supermarkets, stores, religious organiza ons, health care, educa on, family services, auto shops, etc.), other support services (which are unclassified companies), logis cs, u li es, and non-tourism related real estate.

In 2011, the agriculture industry employed 1,613 people in Kaua‘i (Collabora ve Economics, 2015). Apart from jobs in distribu on, the other sub-industries of agriculture – support, research and development, food processing, farming – declined between 2001 and 2011.

1 National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) data provides information on every business establishment in the region. Clusters are identified based on NAICS code classifications and refined through further analysis and review of individual companies.


JULY 2015 21

The Role of Co age Industries

Employment sta s cs may not reflect the many informal jobs that Kaua‘i’s residents use to supplement their incomes and support their households. Co age establishments can result from informal jobs or ac vi es that become more formal over me. Co age establishments are defined as business in residences with fewer than 3 employees. Thirteen percent of total Kaua‘i’s establishments were co age industries in 2011, and those establishments filled 3% of Kaua‘i’s jobs.

Co age industries and entrepreneurial development can be further nurtured on Kaua‘i through resources such as incubators, co-working spaces with affordable workspace and shared equipment, mentoring and professional development, and policies that enable people to operate certain kinds of businesses out of their homes. The regulatory structure governing businesses and co age industries warrants discussion during the GP planning process to ensure that innova on is nurtured and not inadvertently penalized.

The Kapa‘a Business Associa on reports that the one of the biggest issues facing businesses on Kaua‘i is the lack of affordable housing for their employees. Strong, vibrant town centers that include affordable housing above stores on bus routes or in walkable / bike-able distances from jobs can help keep costs down and help small businesses grow.

To summarize, the major Economic Development issues include:

• Kaua‘i remains heavily dependent on tourism as the main anchor indusry. • Industry and anchor clusters reveal sectors that can be nurtured. Anchor industries are growing. • Kaua‘i has areas of specializa on, or industries that are highly concentrated (e.g. certain sub-

categories of Tourism, Defense and Agriculture & Food Products). • Crea ve Industries are small but emerging (e.g. Makers, Fashion & Retail, Film/Music/Media,

Architecture/Design) and can help to create a diversified economy.

Sector 2011 Employment

Tourism 11,026

Rest of the Economy 7,308

Tourism 11,538

Healthcare 4.385

Educa on 3,102

Construc on 2,335

Government 2,436

Technical Services 1,861

Defense 1,666

Agriculture & Food Products

1,592

Fashion & Retail 979

Finance 982

Manufacturing 298

Makers Industry 121


JULY 2015 22

4.2 OPPORTUNITIES

The Kaua‘i Economic Development Board (KEDB) and County of Kaua‘i Office of Economic Development suggest that Kaua‘i’s economy can be guided by the following principles:

• Economic Diversifica on: strengthen selected industry clusters to minimize dependence on a single industry

• Economic Self-Sufficiency: minimize imports and promote import subs tu on • Economic Opportunity for all: offer an appropriate K-20 educa on and adequate training

opportuni es to give workers choices and to promote living wages

These principles led to the development of five goals: 1. To assist new and exis ng businesses create new jobs. 2. To facilitate career planning for students. 3. To expand and train the workforce to meet the needs of employers. 4. To promote affordable housing. 5. To improve the skill level and work readiness of students to achieve career and college success.

There are several organiza ons and en es on Kaua‘i that provide access to business planning assistance, career planning, entrepreneurial training, incuba on, and assistance with permi ng, licensing, and regulatory issues. Some facilitate access to start-up, micro-enterprise, and expansion capital funds.

The County Office of Economic Development is spearheading a Kaua‘i Crea ve Technology Center in Līhu‘e that will provide provide 30,000 square feet of mul purpose crea ve technology facili es. The mission is shown at right. Once completed, the Center is intended to operate as a community hub for arts, innova on, and crea ve technology.

Kaua‘i Crea ve Technology Center Mission

The mission of the Kaua‘i Crea ve Technology Center is to promote crea vity and innova on through the use of technology.

It will manage a state-of-the-art facility that offers industry-grade equipment and technology-based programs that cul vate local talent and catalyze economic growth on Kaua’i.

The Center will serve students from elementary to middle and high school as well as the community college. It will be a venue for the performing arts community as well as for the professional media and film industry. It will provide educa on, job training, and business development opportuni es.


JULY 2015 23

Educa on is a cri cal component of suppor ng future economic opportunity. KEDB’s Aloha ‘Ike program partners with the Department of Educa on to enhance opportuni es for Kaua‘i’s keiki in grades K-12, proving grants to projects that supplement academic programs in public, private, and charter school across the island. Its principles are shown in the text box.

Convergences between economic growth sectors can guide investment to facilitate overall growth. Inves ng in growth sectors with converging needs and interests, or “clusters of opportunity” may help diversify Kaua‘i’s economy. “Opportunity Industries” for Kaua‘i as described in the preceding sec on include sub-categories of tourism, food processing and distribu on, technical services, defense, manufacturing, fashion & retail, and makers. There are examples of cluster industry coali ons that have organized to iden fy and address common areas of need to support collec ve growth. This has occurred on the North Shore of O‘ahu, as described in Developing A Shared Agenda: For the North Shore of Oahu’s Economic Vitality and Community Well-Being Dra Ac on Plan (2013).

All industries can benefit from improved infrastructure and ac ons that protect infrastructure from the repercussions of climate change and sea-level rise. All businesses are threatened by roads that regularly flood or storms that shut down the harbor. Transporta on networks and facili es for agricultural products and workers are cri cal from an economic perspec ve. Storage, processing and transfer sites in proximity to fields, airports and harbors could be improved to support not only greater export opportuni es, but also local food independence and self-sufficiency.

To summarize, the major Economic Development opportuni es include:

• The Economic Development Board has iden fied the principles of diversifica on, self-sufficiency, and economic opportunity to help guide new investment.

• Clusters of economic opportunity can help target investment and focus ini a ves to support small businesses. There are models from other areas that may be emulated.

• Several organiza ons already provide some of the business assistance that Kaua‘i needs and can build upon the findings of the soon-to-be-updated CEDS and the Primary Regional Business Analysis by Collabora ve Economics.

4.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

• Economic Development is addressed in “Suppor ng Businesses and Jobs for Kaua‘i Residents”, “High Technology”, and “Land Supply for Commercial and Industrial Uses” in the 2000 GP.

• The text and data in the 2000 GP is limited on the topic of economic development. Many policies remain sound, but data is required to support recommenda ons.

• The 2000 GP recommends requiring that resorts and businesses seeking zoning and permits use the local labor force as a mechanism for crea ng jobs for the local workforce. This task is being implemented by the Planning Department, and has become a common condi on in zoning and permit approvals.

Kaua‘i Economic Development Board Aloha ‘Ike Program Principles

Encourages teachers and administrators to expand the educa on enrichment opportuni es for their students;

Facilitates the applica on of academic concepts through innova ve project-based learning; and

Develops partnerships with par cipa ng companies, ins tu ons of higher learning, and other members of the community.


JULY 2015 24


Work on economic development to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Incorporate data from 2015 Land Use Buildout Technical Report in regards to land zoned or needed for commercial and industrial ac vi es based on popula on projec ons.

2) Incorporate data about the workforce and clusters of opportunity generated by Collabora ve Economics.

3) Update real estate-specific data will available informa on. 4) Review the updated CEDS for Kaua‘i and incorporate relevant policy materials into the GP Update. 5) Update Table 4-5: Kaua’i Shopping Centers in the 2000 GP using research. 6) Use Table 15 in the Land Use Buildout Technical Report to address Commercial Floor Area by

Planning District. 7) Update Table 4-6: Capacity of Vacant Commercial Zoned Lands in the 2000 GP using data from

Table 16 in the Land Use Buildout Technical Report. 8) Update Table 4-7: Capacity of Vacant Industrial Zoned Lands in the 2000 GP with data from Table

17 in the Land Use Buildout Technical Report. 9) Consider how policies promoted in the updated CEDS relate to land use and infrastructure

policies. 10) Include available data that addresses the impact of small businesses on the economy and the

challenges they face. 11) Document the efforts of the Chamber of Commerce and other business associa ons, and their

understanding of the business climate up to 2035. 12) Other thoughts for discussion may include economic incubators in each district, satellite

educa ons/tech centers and resource guides to improve community-business connec ons.

4.5 RESOURCES

Collabora ve Economics. June 30, 2015. Preliminary Regional Business Analysis: Kaua‘i’s Economy.

Collabora ve Economics. November 2013. Developing A Shared Agenda: For the North Shore of Oahu’s Economic Vitality and Community Well-Being Dra Ac on Plan.

Kapa‘a Business Associa on website. 2015. h p://www.kbaKaua‘i.org/

County of Kauaʻi Office of Economic Development and Kauaʻi Economic Development Board. Kaua‘i’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Report 2005-2015.

State of Hawai’i Enterprise Zone Maps. h p://invest.hawaii.gov/business/ez/

U.S. Census. 2010. Kauaʻi County, Hawai’i.


JULY 2015 25

5.0 AGRICULTURAL LANDS 5.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Quan ty and Quality of Agricultural Lands

A Dra Important Agriculture Land Study was prepared for the GP Update in 2014. According to the study, 144,000 acres of Kaua‘i’s lands are located in the State Land Use Agricultural District. Only 80,000 acres, or 41%, are located in the 2000 General Plan Agricultural District. Approximately 14% of the land in the North Shore Planning District is designated by the 2000 GP for agricultural purposes; 19% of Kapa‘a-Wailuā is designated for agricultural purposes; 24% of Līhu‘e; 19% of South Kauaʻi; 8% of Hanapēpē-‘Ele‘ele; and, approximately 16% of Waimea-Kekaha is designated for agricultural purposes.

Community feedback received to date reflects a strong desire for a diversity of farm sizes and food crops to serve the local market, with limited exports. The economics of farming at a small scale for local consump on versus a larger scale for export needs to be explored in light of this priority. There are also concerns about the compa bility of certain agricultural uses with sensi ve environments (such as the proposed dairy near Māhā’ulepū) and in proximity to schools and residen al areas (evidenced by the concerns over pes cide use by seed corn companies in Waimea). An advantage to encouraging diversified agriculture that is compa ble with surrounding uses is the con nued existence of planta on infrastructure. It will need to be preserved, and in many cases, improved or upgraded to perform to today’s standards. A larger concern is whether or not there is adequate water available to support the desired diversity of agricultural uses.

Water for Agricultural Purposes

Although Hawaii’s sugar industry started during the 1860s, most of the planta on irriga on systems were developed around the turn of the twen eth century. Large quan es of surface water from perennial streams were diverted by intake structures into miles-long transmission ditches and tunnels, moving water from the windward side of the islands to the leeward plains, where abundant dry, fer le lands required irriga on to grow sugar cane. Generally, intake structures include a dam across the streambed, an inlet channel, control gates, trash screen, and a connec ng tunnel or ditch into the main transmission structure—usually another tunnel or ditch. The physical characteris cs of these irriga on systems were designed and constructed prior to the enactment of environmental and zoning statutes. It is now nearly impossible to plan, design, and construct similar irriga on systems without enormous effort and cost. The collapse of the sugar industry resulted in the abandonment of many planta on irriga on systems. With the lack of maintenance, ditches have been overgrown by vegeta on, intake structures have been damaged or clogged, and siphons and flumes have deteriorated.

Beyond adequate infrastructure to channel it, the availability of water has emerged as an uncertainty that has hampered agricultural projects. An example is the Kīlauea Agricultural Park, which completed its environmental compliance in 2009 only to discover that there was no available water. The solu on


JULY 2015 26

nearly tripled the cost of the project (“Kīlauea Farming Project Gets Legs”, The Garden Island, August 7, 2015).

The County’s Water Department is currently working with the Department of Agriculture and Agribusiness Development to develop agricultural water use projec ons. Their technical approach includes the selec on of crops that can be irrigated with rainfall, whenever possible, rehabilita ng and repairing exis ng and former irriga on systems, and maximizing use of lower quality water (reuse water, surface water, brackish water) whenever possible.

Crops for Fuel, Fiber, and Research

There is a movement to explore local produc on of crops for fuel and fiber, and to take a hard look at the poten al impacts of cul va ng gene cally modified organisms (GMO), and gene cally engineered (GE) crops.

Kaua‘i’s Chamber of Commerce es mated that the seed crop companies have a $220 million annual economic impact on Kaua‘i (LaVentura, 2013). The Chamber of Commerce and College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii at Mānoa, credits the seed corn and coffee companies with diversifying the agriculture industry and keeping land in agriculture since the decline of sugar and pineapple. Kaua‘i’s Office of Economic Development es mates that the seed companies have contributed more than $1 million to maintain the irriga on systems on the west side.

Because GMO and GE prac ces can impact the soils of neighboring lands and air quality, the County Council has considered new regulatory requirements pertaining to the availability of documenta on of such prac ces and no fica ons. Ini al legisla ve acts were rejected by the Hawai‘i Courts as lacking jurisdic on. Land use regula ons involving GMOs may not violate the U.S. Cons tu on’s Fi h Amendment “takings clause”; i.e., private property may not be taken for public uses without a public purpose and without just compensa on. In other words, regula ons may not be so stringent that a property owner is denied their en re ability to use their property.

Designa on of Important Agricultural Lands

The dra Important Agricultural Lands Study includes five major recommenda ons. Recommenda ons #1 to #3 focus on establishing a County process for incen vizing and encouraging IAL designa ons. Recommenda on #4 directs the County and encourages the State to use maps and tools developed during this study process when reviewing pe ons for designa on and when considering candidate lands for County or State-led pe ons. Recommenda on #5 acknowledges opportuni es for reviewing, expanding, and integra ng recommenda ons made in this study in the forthcoming General Plan update. Landowners of important agricultural lands and farmers are keenly interested in maintaining their property rights and ability to maximize the use of their land now and in the future. Designa ng land as Important Agricultural Lands in perpetuity provides tax relief and certain protec ons, but it may limit their ability to develop their property. So far, 16,263 acres of agricultural land have been designated by private landowners on Kaua‘i. County-ini ated IAL designa ons have been considered, but not submi ed to the State Land Use Commission.


JULY 2015 27

Agricultural Infrastructure

Agricultural produc on is supported by essen al infrastructure for irriga on, storage, and distribu on. This includes roads and transporta on networks that are shared with non-commercial users. Maintenance of infrastructure in safe and working condi on is crucial to support food produc on goals and manage the costs of producing and transpor ng crops on Kaua‘i. The County’s 2012 Mul modal Land Transporta on Plan provides recommenda ons to support agricultural transporta on needs, as listed in the text box at right.

People who par cipated in the mee ngs associated with the prepara on of the 2014 Important Agriculture Land Study were par cularly concerned about the maintenance of reservoirs and new dam safety rules. The Ka Loko dam disaster and deaths caused by the dam breach remains top of mind. Par cipants also cited the need for a comprehensive update to the water inventory and management plan and raised concerns about the high cost of producing and transpor ng food on island.

To summarize, the major issues in Agriculture and Food Sustainability include:

• Agricultural land is well-distributed among all of the island’s Planning Districts. • The IAL concluded that Kaua‘i has sufficient land with which to a ain food self-sufficiency.

Economic and other incen ves are needed to encourage actualiza on of this goal. • Crops for fuel and fiber can be explored to add to the diversity of products for Kaua‘i. • While many are wary of GMO’s possible impact on the environment, others recognize that

seed and coffee growers contribute to crop diversifica on and maintain agricultural land uses. • Infrastructure needs include dam and reservoir maintenance, water for irriga on purposes,

and efficient transporta on networks for producing and transpor ng food.

5.2 OPPORTUNITIES

The County’s farming industry is transi oning away from the single crop, large scale planta on model. Gay and Robinson harvested its last sugar crop in 2009. The Līhu‘e Mill came down in 2012. New crops, new land uses, and technological advances are all presen ng themselves as opportuni es to be layered over historic and cultural rela onships to the land. The seed industry, for example, has doubled its acreage, and the Kaua‘i Coffee Company has one of the highest acreages of coffee grown in the na on. Small, organic family farms are prolifera ng on the North Shore. Addi onal interest in farming and healthy ea ng can be found in the emergence and/or increase in community gardens, food forests, farm-to-table restaurants, and sunshine markets.

The 2014 Important Agriculture Land Study states, “Agriculture is the history and lifeline of these Hawaiian Islands.” This is especially true for Kaua‘i where produc ve agricultural lands are cri cal to the economy and the produc on of healthy foods consumed locally. Agricultural ac vi es also touch upon jobs, housing, transporta on, and growing/processing of materials. Understanding the history associated with food produc on in Kaua‘i is useful for very prac cal reasons, like the need to maintain

The County’s 2012 “Mul modal Land Transporta on Plan” recommends that the County focus its agricultural transporta on efforts in the following areas: • Reducing the cost of transpor ng and processing

locally-grown farm products; • Protec ng against disrup on of on-island

transporta on networks during storms and other emergencies;

• Improving access by residents and visitors to healthy foods, including locally-grown and raised fruits, vegetables, grass-fed beef, sea foods, and dairy products; and

• Ensuring agriculture workers have affordable and reliable access to their jobs.


JULY 2015 28

exis ng irriga on systems. Given the resurgence of interest in Hawaiian culture (as documented in the Kaua‘i Planning and Ac on Alliance’s 2012 Measuring What Ma ers for Kaua‘i report), it is likely that more people will turn to farming to sa sfy household and ‘ohana needs, but also as an occupa on. New niches are forming thanks to the “Kaua‘i Made” brand. The schools and Kaua‘i Community College are nurturing this interest and providing training.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Agricultural Lands include:

• New crops, new land uses, and new technologies are presen ng themselves as the agricultural industry transi ons from the single crop, planta on model.

• Small, organic enterprises – ranging from farms to retail to restaurants – are crea ng a need for agricultural lands.

• The resurgence in Hawaiian culture, healthy ea ng and a more self-sufficient lifestyle is genera ng more interest in agriculture.

• Schools and the community college are well-posi oned to nurture this interest in agriculture and provide training.

5.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED AGRICULTURE

• The Agriculture sec on in the 2000 GP reflects older thinking. It will need to be rewri en to reflect recent changes to the industry and new regula ons regarding the designa on of Important Agricultural Lands. The IAL and 2015 Land Use Buildout Technical Report contain the majority of data needed to update this Chapter.

• The 2000 GP addresses aquaculture within the agriculture chapter. • The 2000 GP included an Implemen ng Ac on (4-26) reques ng the Planning Department to

submit an amendment to the CZO that would eliminate the requirement to subdivide in order to grant a long-term lease for agricultural use only (no dwelling use). This revision was intended to encourage land owners to make land available to small farmers, and has not yet been ini ated. Alterna vely, an amendment may not be needed, if the exis ng “Agricultural Parks” process can be u lized more extensively.

• The 2000 GP included an Implemen ng Ac on (4-26) reques ng the Planning Department to submit an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance that would require preserva on of viable irriga on systems. This revision was intended to maintain viable irriga on systems – both government- and privately-owned – and to support the supply of irriga on water to farmers at reasonable prices. This has not been ini ated.

• The 2000 GP included an Implemen ng Ac on (5-6) reques ng the Planning Department to amend the CZO to implement the policies for Agricultural lands in the GP. These included amendments to site planning standards and criteria for approving and Agricultural Community. The Planning Department a empted to amend the CZO accordingly and was unsuccessful. Controls on the subdivision of lands to prevent loss of agricultural poten al and rural character are s ll needed.


JULY 2015 29


Work on agriculture and food sustainability to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) A significant amount of current research and collabora ve thinking has gone into the 2014 Important Agriculture Land Study. The Study’s findings and recommenda ons were ve ed by a diversity of community leaders and outside experts, and should be introduced to the CAC for considera on. Recommenda ons ar culated in the study should be evaluated for its incorpora on in the General Plan policies.

2) In accordance with the recommenda ons contained in the IAL Study, the updated GP will need to help reconcile:

a. Increasing access to water and water infrastructure improvement for agricultural irriga on.

b. Increasing access to land (to lease or own) for farmers growing food and primary resources ( mber, holis c medicines, etc.).

c. Improving upon or redeveloping a system for local and export marke ng of food and (primary) resources.

3) Table 4-4: Kaua’i’s Agricultural Lands (acres) in the 2000 GP can be updated with the Land Use Buildout Technical Report and Table 2 and informa on on page 9, as well as the IAL Technical Report Table 4.

4) The GP Team will need to decide where to locate references to aquaculture in the GP – either in “Agriculture” or “Economic Development”.

5) The zoning of agricultural lands needs closer a en on in order to confirm that the Important Agricultural Lands are, in fact, zoned for agricultural uses, that residen al uses on agricultural lands are appropriately scaled and clustered, and that these lands are physically accessible and have access to necessary water supplies.

6) Research conducted during the GP planning process may reveal that there are more land use conflicts between the Agriculture and Urban Districts than currently assumed or documented.

7) Given how the industry is changing, the GP Planning process may also consider rethinking how agriculture is regulated and incen vized. Agricultural zoning typically specifies the density of development and permi ed uses. In many agricultural zoning ordinances, the density is controlled by se ng a large minimum lot size for a residen al structure, but densi es may also vary depending upon the type of agricultural opera on and proximity between other proper es or uses.

8) Land use regula ons are not the only way to impact agricultural ac vi es. The County could consider financial incen ves or programs to support maintaining and growing agricultural ac vi es, such as purchase of development rights and conserva on easements.

a. Purchase of development rights (PDR). A program that allows property owners to voluntarily sell the development rights to their land at fair market value in return for deeding a permanent conserva on easement held by a land trust or local government.

b. Agricultural conserva on easement. A voluntary (legally recorded) agreement between a landowner and a qualified conserva on organiza on, o en a land trust, which restricts land to agricultural and open space uses.

c. Farmland mi ga on programs. Can help preserve agricultural lands. They involve protec ng farmland by providing equivalent farm acreage elsewhere when agricultural land is converted to other uses, or paying a fee when farmland is converted to other uses.


JULY 2015 30

5.5 RESOURCES

County of Kaua‘i Important Agriculture Land Study. December 2014.

State of Hawai’i, Department of Agriculture. December 2004. Agricultural Water Use and Development Plan.

LaVenture, Tom. The Garden Island. September 15, 2013. GMO, by the numbers.

Lyte, Bri any. The Garden Island. August 7, 2015. Kīlauea Faming Project Gets Legs.


JULY 2015 31

6.0 TOURISM 6.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Kaua‘i’s tourism industry is the largest sector of the Island’s economy. It regularly accounts for about 33% of the County’s real income, generates more than a quarter of the jobs on Kaua‘i, and contributes substan ally to the county tax revenues (Kaua‘i Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, 2010). The tourism industry employed 11,029 of Kaua‘i’s residents in 2011 (Collabora ve Economics, 2015).

In 2014, Kaua‘i received 1,113,605 visitors, who stayed an average of 7.71 days and spent $171 per day. Of these, 70% were returning visitors while 30% were new. Three out of four were independent travelers. The average visitor count per day is 23,536. Visitors increase Kaua‘i’s popula on by as much as 22% on any given day. Direct visitor spending for an average year in the first decade of this century was about $1,087 million. DBEDT’s visitor industry Input-Output model shows that the indirect and induced effects of visitor expenditures prac cally double the amount of direct expenditures.

Because tourism is sensi ve to disrup ons including economic downturns, climate events, and world geopoli cal events, it has been the County’s objec ve to diversify the local economy and thereby reduce its dominant effect on total economic output.

Tourism can have nega ve side effects. The Island’s million-plus annual visitors place stress on local infrastructure and increase the demand for public services. Visitor impacts on natural resources and parks were iden fied as a concern in the 2000 GP, and remains a concern today. Major visitor des na ons on Kaua'i – par cularly Kē'ē Beach (Hā'ena State Park), Kalalau (Na Pali Coast State Wilderness Park), and the Waimea and Kōke’e State Parks - are underfunded and in need of improved maintenance.

Kaua‘i Tourism Strategic Plan (2015) notes that a key issue is the significant fluctua on throughout the year in the number of visitors. When the daily visitor count is over approximately 25,000, the island’s roads, beaches and other infrastructure are taxed, and the visitor experience and resident quality of life diminish. There is interest in managing the “peaks and valleys” in the visitor count. The peaks typically occur in the mid-June to August and during the winter holidays. In December 2014, the daily visitor count reached 26,170. Un l there is improvement in the island’s infrastructure, the desirable range of visitors per day is within the range of 23,000 to 25,000, thus ensuring valleys and peaks are evened out.

The parking situa on at Kē'ē Beach is an example of the challenges. Hāʻena State Park lies at the “end of the road” on Kaua‘i’s north shore. Both visitors and locals appreciate the ancient sea caves, beach, opportuni es for shore fishing, and viewing of the Nāpali Coast. The trailhead for the 11-mile Kalalau Trail begins in this park. The limited parking quickly fills up and results in a combina on of illegal parking


JULY 2015 32

and /or frustra on for those who have driven far to enjoy the park or trail. There are high instances of the and vandalism at this parking area, as well as many others around the island.

Several important visitor des na ons have recently updated plans, or plans that are well underway. State Parks and the Ha’ena community are working together to refine and adopt a park master plan for Ha’ena State Park. Another issue associated with tourism is the prolifera on of alterna ve visitor accommoda on units such as Transient Vaca on Rentals (TVRS) and Bed & Breakfast (B&B) opera ons, specifically outside of the designated visitor des na on areas (VDA). The 2000 General Plan called for the County to recognize “alterna ve visitor accommoda ons,” as well as enact clear standards and permit processes for regula ng alterna ve visitor accommoda ons structures and opera ons in Residen al, Agriculture, Open and Resort zoning districts. Although the TVR and Homestay ordinances have begun to implement the 2000 General Plan policy regarding the regula on of alterna ve visitor accommoda ons, there is s ll concern that such uses may have nega ve and adverse impacts on certain residen al neighborhoods zoned outside of the visitor des na on areas. In addi on to altering the character of the community because of the constant turnover of different people, neighborhoods with TVRS decrease the affordable housing inventory for local residents. Illegal alterna ve accommoda ons outside of the visitor des na on areas puts a strain on enforcement efforts with limited staff and resources.

To summarize, the major issues in Tourism include:

• Tourism is the largest sector in Kaua‘i’s economy, and one of Kaua‘i’s only basic industries. • Tourism is sensi ve to economic disrup ons, major weather events, and geo-poli cal issues. • Tourism places high demands on infrastructure, services, and natural resources. • A balance is needed to accommodate visitors and residents harmoniously.

6.2 OPPORTUNITIES

A strong tourism industry can honor the people, culture, and heritage of Kaua‘i. It can support and enhance the quality of life for residents; add value and perpetuate the natural and cultural resources of Kaua‘i. It can support a vibrant and sustainable economy, and provide a unique, memorable, and enriching visitor experience.

According to the 2005-2015 Kauaʻi Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), leaders in the visitor industry on Kauaʻi iden fied the needs that require immediate a en on and ac on. These areas include:

• Improving the condi on of State and County parks • Addressing the issues of safety and security • Improving direc onal signage • Providing improved interpre ve signage • Crea ng more regional visitor/cultural centers around the Island • Conduct a study of cruise ship social, economic, and physical impacts, infrastructure

improvements required, and costs • Create an educa onal program, beginning in middle school, on the importance of the visitor

industry to Kaua`i’s economy and the State as a whole


JULY 2015 33

While the general areas for improvement included in the 2005-2015 remain important, the 2010 CEDS included a more specific list of infrastructure improvements (iden fied by industry leaders):

• Wailuā emergency bypass road (between Hanamā’ulu and Wailuā River)

• Līhu‘e Airport runway expansion • Puhi-Līhu‘e-Hanamā‘ulu water system • Kūhiō Highway relief route (between Hanamā’ulu and

Kealia)

Kaua‘i’s Tourism Strategic Plan Update was released in July 2015. It includes strategies and measures that work toward five key objec ves, shown in the text box at right.

Visitor housing op ons con nue to expand. Hotels and resorts are no longer the only op on. The diversity of op ons can appeal to more people, and help grow the industryThe Buildout Analysis suggests that there is basically enough land Resort zoned land to accommodate visitor growth.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Tourism include:

• A strong tourism industry can honor Kaua‘i’s heritage, create jobs, generate revenue that can improve local services and facili es, and spread aloha beyond the Island.

• There is sufficient land zoned for resort facili es to accommodate visitor growth. • Alterna ve visitor des na ons can generate new revenue for property owners and offer visitors

an op on to staying in a resort. • Alterna ve transporta on such as airport shu les, shu les to popular des na ons, and visitor

use of bicycles and walking paths.

6.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED TOURISM

• The “Visitor Industry” chapter is one of the longer ones in the 2000 GP. Beginning with visitor projec ons, it includes data and discussion pertaining to the number, types, and loca ons of units needed to accommodate visitors.

• The 2000 GP addresses the impact of visitors on parks and natural resource areas, but does not discuss the impact of visitors on other infrastructure or transporta on systems.

• The 2000 GP recommended amending the CZO to set development standards and permit process for alterna ve visitor accommoda on structures. This has been implemented through Ordinances 987, 904, 876, and 864. Development standards now exist for B&Bs, vaca on rentals, retreat centers and inns.


Work on tourism to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Update the analysis from the 2000 GP with data from the 2015 Land Use Buildout and Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Reports, Tourism Strategic Plan, and CEDS.

Kaua‘i Dra Tourism Strategic Plan Objec ves (2015)

1. To make posi ve contribu ons to the quality of life for residents.

2. To increase the economic contribu on of the visitor industry to Kaua‘i.

3. To increase communica ons, interac ons and understanding between stakeholder groups, especially between residents and the visitor industry.

4. To maintain and improve visitor sa sfac on with their experience on Kaua‘i.

5. To reinforce authen c Na ve Hawaiian culture and local Kaua‘i culture, the founda ons of our unique sense of place.


JULY 2015 34

2) Update the area-specific discussion of trends in the 2000 GP with input from updated plans and agency representa ves.

3) Update Table 4-1: Es mate of Overall Demand for Visitor Units in 2020 in the 2000 GP with Table 11 in the Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report.

4) Update Table 4-2: Visitor Units by Area and Type, 1999 in the 2000 GP with the Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report Table 12 (by area) and with the Hawai‘i Tourism Authority “2014 Visitor Plant Inventory” (by area, property and unit type).

5) Update Table 4-3: Summary of Poten al Visitor Units, by Status and Area in the 2000 GP with the Land Use Buildout Technical Report Table 20 Hawai‘i Tourism Authority “2014 Visitor Plant Inventory” (planned addi ons and new developments).

6) Discuss means for the County and State to manage visitor-driven conges on, such as by integra ng work conducted for the North Shore/South Shore Shu le Study into the GP Tourism and Transporta on sec ons.

7) The GP planning process could examine the list of tourism projects based on their impact on other policy areas in the GP. According to the 2015 Land Use Buildout Technical Report, in all Planning Districts except for the North Shore, the exis ng inventory - plus proposed new developments - exceed the projected need for tourist accommoda ons. Līhu‘e had the most excess followed by Waimea-Kekaha, Kapa’a-Wailuā, and South Kaua‘i. The Technical Report suggests that the projected deficit for the North Shore can be accommodated by the extensive supply of poten al single-family transient vaca on rentals within the Visitor Des na on Areas. However, the GP planning process might generate alterna ve solu ons.

6.5 RESOURCES

State of Hawai‘i, Division of State Parks Department of Land and Natural Resources. June 2014. Kōke‘e and Waimea Canyon State Parks Master Plan.

Hawai‘i Tourism Authority. 2014. Visitor Plant Inventory. h p://www.hawaiitourismauthority.org/default/assets/File/2014%20Visitor%20Plant%20Inventory%20Report%20(FINAL).pdf

County of Kauaʻi Office of Economic Development and Kauaʻi Economic Development Board. Kaua‘i’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Report 2005-2015.

The Kauaʻi County Tourism Strategic Plan: 2006-2015- partnership with the County, Industry, and the Kaua‘i Visitor’s Bureau.

County of Kaua‘I Office of Economic Development, July 2015. Kaua‘I Tourism Strategic Plan Update 2016-2018.

SMS Research & Marke ng Services, Inc. February 2014 Kaua‘i General Plan Update: Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts.

Azambuja, Léo. June 6, 2013. Dahilig Outlines Plan for TVRs. The Garden Island. h p://thegardenisland.com/news/local/govt-and-poli cs/dahilig-outlines-plan-for-tvrs/ar cle_170c980c-ce76-11e2-9c99-0019bb2963f4.html

PBR. Ha’ena State Park Master Plan. h p://pbrhawaii.com/?project=Hā‘ena-state-park-master-plan


JULY 2015 35

7.0 OPEN SPACE 7.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

What people perceive as “open space” in Kaua‘i is either undeveloped land, agricultural land, or land that is regulated to limit development. Kaua‘i limits development with the General Plan “Open” designa on and the CZO’s “Open District”.

According to the 2015 Land Use Buildout Technical Report, the General Plan “Open” designa on comprises over 70% of the island. The Open designa on includes the State Conserva on District and other open areas such as golf courses. Land designated as Open is distributed across the island as follows: Waimea-Kekaha (39%); North Shore (27%); Līhu‘e (12%); Kapa’a-Wailuā (10%); Hanapēpē-Ele’ele (7%); and South Kaua‘i (4%).

According to Sec on 5.3.1 of the 2000 GP, lands designated Open shall: “…remain predominantly free of development involving buildings, paving and other construc on.” With the excep on of kuleanas and other small lots of record, any construc on that is permi ed shall be clearly incidental to the use and open character of the surrounding lands.

General Plan designated open spaces include important land forms such as mountains; coastal bluffs; cinder cones; stream valleys; na ve plant and wildlife habitat; areas of predominantly steep slopes; beaches and coastal areas suscep ble to coastal erosion or hurricane, tsunami, or storm-wave inunda on; wetlands and flood plains; important scenic resources; known natural, historic and archaeological resources; and, areas commi ed to outdoor recrea on. During the GP Update community mee ngs, feedback indicated that emphasis should be added on preserving scenic quali es of open space, and specifying a preference for sustainable land uses and landscapes.

Lands designated as “Open” in the 2000 General Plan are typically designated as “Agricultural” or “Open” in the CZO. Kaua‘i limits development in its Open and Agricultural Districts, which comprise much of the open space between towns. Under the CZO, single-family residences are allowed within the Open District. As a result of a stronger emphasis on preserving open lands, the County passed Ordinance 896 in 2010 to close a density “bonus” loophole in the CZO and further limit development in this District.

Open spaces between communi es help reinforce community iden ty. A compact community can form a strong sense of place when it is surrounded by open space. A person knows when they are entering a community when the large expanses of open space ends. Kaua‘i residents like this rela onship between the built areas and open land, and want to keep it that way.


JULY 2015 36

Open Space Acquisi on

The County has established a framework for funding land acquisi ons, with a focus on park expansion areas and shoreline access ways. The Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preserva on Fund was established by County Charter and receives a minimum of 1.5% of the County’s annual cer fied real property taxes. The callout at right explains the intended applica on of the funds.

Grants from the State’s Land Conserva on Fund are also available through the Legacy Land Conserva on Program to State agencies, coun es, and non-profit land conserva on organiza ons seeking funding to acquire property that has value as a resource to Hawai‘i. County agency or nonprofit land conserva on organiza on grant recipients must provide matching funds of at least 25% of the total project costs. The Legacy Land Conserva on Program provides grants to local organiza ons and agencies seeking to purchase and protect lands having cultural, natural, agricultural, historical, and recrea onal resources. There is a big difference between open spaces that are protected (in perpetuity) and those that are perceived as open, but are simply not yet developed. Community dissent arises when vacant lands people had cherished – and perceived as protected – are developed. Access to many tradi onal gathering places is now obstructed. There is compe on for both access and use of areas that once were accessible for hun ng, gathering, fishing, and recrea on. The County may never have enough money to acquire all the land that needs protec ng. Preven ng the development of land has implica ons for the tax base and popula on growth that are worth exploring.

To summarize, the major issues in Open Space include:

• Open spaces contribute greatly to the public’s percep on that Kaua‘i is “the Garden Island”. • Open spaces between towns help maintain and reinforce a community’s iden ty. • Open spaces protect natural resources. • Defining the important quali es of open space will be informa ve in developing policy for the

GP Update. • The GP Update process may involve iden fying open spaces that are in need of protec on

through re-zoning or addi on to the Heritage Resources Maps.

7.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Much of the open space between towns (along the roadways) is zoned for agriculture or open space purposes. While tradi onal zoning districts can maintain uses to a certain extent, both agricultural and open space zoning districts allow for residen al ac vity.

A scenic view plane ordinance was proposed in the 2000 GP to further protect open spaces. It called for prepara on of a Scenic Roadways Report, which is not yet complete. Protec ng scenic views should be revisited, in addi on to exploring new tools to protect open spaces. An Urban Edge Boundary, as

The County Charter specifies that the Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preserva on Fund will be used to ”acquire lands or property en tlements for the following purposes: outdoor recrea on and educa on, including access to beaches and mountains; preserva on of historic or culturally important land areas and sites; protec on of significant habitats or ecosystems, including buffer zones; preserving forests, beaches, coastal areas, and agricultural lands; protec ng watershed lands to preserve water quality and water supply; conserving land in order to reduce erosion, floods, landslides, and runoff; improving disabled and public access to, and enjoyment of, public land and open space; and acquiring disabled and public access to public land and open space.”


JULY 2015 37

discussed in the Land Uses and Growth Management sec on of this Paper, can help limit the extent of urban sprawl and delineate town edges and open spaces.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Open Space include:

• A scenic view plane ordinance can help protect open spaces with view planes. • An urban edge boundary can limit the extent of sprawl, and protect open spaces.

7.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED OPEN SPACE

• The 2000 GP includes an “Open Lands” sec on. The delinea on of “Open Lands” was revised in the 2000 GP to address the incorpora on of Open-zoned lands in subdivisions of Agriculture land. Prior to revisions recommended by the 2000 GP, the number of lots that could be created under Open zoning were added to the number that could be created under Agriculture zoning, even though the actual lands designated as open may be undevelopable because they were located, as in the example of the Waipake subdivision, in a stream gulch. The 2000 GP suggested that the “density bonus” for Open lands contradicts the intent of the Open district and of the Agriculture district development standards. To correct this situa on, the 2000 GP recommended that the CZO be amended. Open-zoned lands within Agriculture-zoned proper es should be treated as “Agriculture” for purposes of determining the allowable number of residen al lots. Coun ng all acreage as Agriculture gives the benefit of the addi onal land to the owner while observing the intent of the Agriculture district’s density limita ons.

• The 2000 GP recommended protec ng scenic views with a new ordinance. This has not yet been done.

• The 2000 GP recommends reviewing of the zoning maps and the CZO provisions rela ng to the Open District and the Constraint Districts. This is an ongoing effort.


Work on open space to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Consider the impact of changes to the Open District. 2) Consider policies for a transfer of development rights (TDR) and/or Purchase of Development

Rights (PDR) program on Kaua'i. 3) Update the descrip on of the General Plan Open Designa on to prevent confusion with the

Open District and the concept of “Open Space”. Consider calling the Open District the “Natural Infrastructure” or “Natural” District.

4) Examine how Līhu‘e’s recommended Urban Edge Boundary (from the adopted Līhu‘e Community Plan) can, or should, be applied elsewhere. Explore other alterna ves for protec ng open spaces surrounding communi es.

5) The CAC and County Planning Department may wish to include text that reflects upon the efficacy of the zone change in the 2000 General Plan. The sec on will need to include new text that describes the current Open zone.

6) In order to enact an ordinance protec ng scenic views as recommended by the 2000 GP, a Scenic Roadways Report will need to be prepared that iden fies important views. This is outside the scope of the GP Update and will need to be undertaken as a separate project.

7) County review of the zoning maps and the CZO provisions rela ng to the Open District and the Constraint Districts is ongoing, and may be helpful to inform the GP Update. The Constraint Districts, in par cular, can be reviewed by the County to eliminate regula ons that are no longer


JULY 2015 38

relevant, to improve the effec veness of relevant regula ons, and to simplify zoning administra on.

7.5 RESOURCES

County of Kaua‘i Public Access, Open Space & Natural Resources Reserva on Fund Commission. 2013. 2013 Report to the Kaua‘i County Council and Mayor Bernard Carvalho, Jr.


JULY 2015 39

8.0 AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING 8.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Housing on Kaua‘i is expensive and homeownership is beyond the reach of many households. This is true for newly-formed families, for the elderly, for just about everyone. Sixty percent of the housing inventory is affordable to less than 25% of residents. According to HUD income limits, the majority of the exis ng housing supply can only be afforded by households earning over 180% of the average median income.

An analysis of housing needs conducted by the Kaua‘i Housing Agency for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan iden fied the following trends:

• Housing affordability is a problem. Renter and owner households below 30% of median, and between 30%-50% of median have the highest housing cost burden among households below 100% of AMI paying greater than 50% of their income on housing costs.

• Overcrowded housing is a problem. Renters experience a dispropor onately higher incidence of severe overcrowding than owners.

• Substandard housing is a problem. Significantly more renters experience substandard housing (lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facili es) than owners with similar household incomes.

According to the 2014 Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts technical report prepared for the GP Update, average annual job growth for the County of Kaua‘i is expected to equal 0.79% over the next few years. Between 2020 and 2030, job growth is expected to occur at an average annual rate of 0.66%. The rate is expected to dip again to 0.53% during the period between 2030 and 2035, adding less than 1,000 jobs. The idea behind inves ng in specific cluster industries (as discussed in the Economic Development sec on of this Paper) is to create jobs to pay for housing and other living costs. In the mean me, the cost of living con nues to increase, with housing and transporta on costs consuming a large por on of a household’s income.

Some housing is built far from commercial areas and community services, so residents must rely heavily on private vehicles to get around. Such reliance is bad for the environment, physical health, and contributes to traffic conges on. Many exis ng homes could benefit from renova on or expansion. As Kaua‘i’s popula on ages, homes may need to be retrofi ed for greater accessibility, or expand to accommodate mul -genera onal households.

According to the Hawai‘i Housing Planning Study (2011) and Consolidated Plan (2015-2020), of the 1,312 housing units needed by year 2016, 376 units are for ownership and 936 units are for rental. Approximately 86% of rental units needed are for families below 80% of median income. Unit type needed by low-income families is mostly mul -family. Units that are needed to serve elderly households account for approximately 19 percent of total needed units by year 2016.


JULY 2015 40

There is an insufficient amount of affordable housing for the disabled, elderly, homeless individuals and families, and young families. The lack of affordable housing, results in overcrowding, which in turn fuels the demand for illegal or substandard housing units. Due to the high cost of living, many families cannot save enough money for the requisite down payment and closing costs (which are the highest in the na on) needed to purchase a home. The cost of living is exacerbated by high transporta on costs and energy costs, and leaves many families with li le discre onary income.. As such, it is becoming more difficult for young couples to afford their first home, for the elderly to keep their homes, and for children to return to, or remain on, Kaua‘i a er gradua ng from college. Kaua‘i’s 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan recommends strategies to remove or ameliorate the barriers to affordable housing, as shown in the text box below.

2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Strategies for Affordable Housing

Land Use Controls - The Housing Agency will support efforts that streamline the planning, zoning and permi ng process through the administra on of the county’s 201-H policy and processing of development exemp ons for eligible applicants that develop at least 51% of the total project units as affordable housing.

Affordable Housing Task Force - The Housing Agency will con nue to assist private developers through the Affordable Housing Task Force. The Task Force consists of representa ve from county line review agencies and provides a private developer the opportunity to dialogue and receive feedback to help streamline project review me.

Expedited Permi ng - The Housing Agency will con nue to recommend expedited permi ng for affordable housing projects. Projects so designated will be given preferen al permi ng by review agencies.

Fee and Charges - The Housing Agency will con nue to administer requests for waivers of fees and charges allowed for affordable housing pursuant to Kauaʻi County Code for building permits, sewer connec on fees, environmental impact assessment fees, etc.

Growth Limits - Con nue to support the development of comprehensive planning for the island’s communi es consistent with the General Plan update. Endorse planning principles that integrate reasonable growth principles.

Policies that Affect the Return on Residen al Investment - The County will impose deed restric ons on the transfer of dwelling units according to the minimum requirements of Ordinance No. 860. This deed restric on requires owner occupancy of the units. If the owner wishes to sell their unit within a buyback period, the unit must be first offered to the County at a price determined by a prescribed formula.


JULY 2015 41

It should be noted that the “buyback provision” included in the last strategy may require further analysis, given that the prescribed formula results in a price that is o en beyond the County’s ability to pay; thus, allowing the affordable unit to become a market-rate unit.

To summarize, the major issues in Affordable and Workforce Housing include:

• Much of Kaua‘i’s housing is not affordable – especially to the elderly, homeless, young families, and disabled - and households are spending too much of their incomes on housing costs.

• In response to the lack of affordability, people are living in crowded and sub-standard condi ons.

• New homes are o en built far from town centers, which means people need to rely on cars to get around. A heavy reliance on personal vehicles is expensive, bad for one’s health and the environment.

• Kaua‘i lacks a diversity of housing op ons. Mul family housing stock is very limited. Large lot, single-family housing is not affordable for most of the resident popula on, yet most of Kaua‘i’s vacant residen al land is zoned for large lot housing. Housing for residents will be an increasing challenge, par cularly for aging households, whose numbers are rapidly increasing.

8.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Housing is expensive due to high land and materials costs and out-of-state demand. These factors are not easily controlled. The regulatory process and design standards are more easily adjusted to achieve policy objec ves. For example, Kaua‘i’s Affordable Workforce Housing Ordinance recognizes that affordable housing is not produced at sufficient rates, and therefore requires developers to build affordable housing as a condi on of market-rate housing approval. In response to concerns that the mandatory produc on of affordable housing was preven ng development altogether, the percentage of required produc on was recently reduced. Changes to the Ordinance will hopefully result in the actual produc on of more affordable housing by the private sector.

While the Workforce Housing Ordinance targets specific households and addresses well-defined, cri cal needs, alone the Ordinance will not sa sfy all outstanding housing issues. It is an important op on along a con nuum of poten al solu ons. Kaua‘i’s Housing Agency already implements a variety of programs designed to provide emergency shelter, promote homeownership, expedite the permi ng of affordable housing produc on, offer loans to purchase or rehabilitate housing, among others. Sources of funds that are poten ally available to address housing needs include: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, Sec on 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, Economic Development Ini a ve, U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development programs, private founda ons, State CIP funds, and County funds. Federal funds are very prescrip ve in terms of households income categories served. In contrast, locally-established and funded programs can be customized to serve those who fall between the federal programs and market-rate units.

Land Use Policies for Housing Diversity and a Mix of Uses

The land use and building code regula ons can be revised to facilitate the construc on of a broad mix of housing. For example, the County could:

• Allow for more mixed-use zoning, so that more people may live close to town, near bus stops, and above shops, and thereby save on transporta on costs.

• Allow for the construc on of smaller dwelling units. • Create a system similar to 201H that priori zes, expedites review, and reduces fees for a greater

variety of affordable housing projects.


JULY 2015 42

• Reduce lot sizes and allow for more mul -family units in certain districts. • Allow for increased heights in certain districts. • Revise building codes to allow for the construc on of a greater diversity of housing unit types,

at lower costs.

Infill and/or redevelopment can produce more affordable housing without sprawl, and may be less expensive than “greenfield” development because it is closer to exis ng infrastructure. Both the Līhu‘e and South Kaua‘i Community Plans, adopted in 2015, call for housing, including affordable housing, in compact walkable communi es.

There is also an opportunity to look at incorpora ng “Missing Middle” housing as infill or development in walkable town centers. Coined by Dan Parolek of Op cos Design Inc., the “Missing Middle” is characterized by small-scale, mul -unit housing types such as duplexes, fourplexes, bungalow courts, and mansion apartments that are not bigger than a large house, that are integrated throughout most walkable Pre-1940s neighborhoods, o en integrated into blocks with primarily single-family homes, and provide diverse housing choices and generate enough density to support transit and locally-serving commercial ameni es. Suppor ng the construc on of the “Missing Middle” could result in the produc on of more diverse and affordable housing op ons.

Hawaiian Homelands Housing

The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) works to ensure that na ve Hawaiian families have homes and land to call their own. The 2004 DHHL Kaua‘i Island Plan designates three priority tracts for development. These are the residen al areas of Wailuā, Hanapēpē, and Anahola/ Kamalomalo‘o. These priority areas reflect the Department’s emphasis on developing large master-planned communi es to provide as many houses as possible to beneficiaries, in the shortest amount of me and at the least cost. The DHHL has also longer-term plans to develop agricultural and pastoral homesteads; lands for community uses that include schools and park sites; a small amount of commercial and industrial sites; and, to encourage large scale agriculture or ranching on the 13,000 acres of land island-wide that are designated for General Agriculture. Alloca on of Residen al Zoned Lands

If the GP includes recommenda ons to allow for more residen al land uses (increasing the supply of housing) and more affordable housing types, the CZO could subsequently be revised to reflect such inten ons. According to the 2015 Land Use Buildout Analysis,

When considering alterna ves to ensure that there is adequate zoning to accommodate the projected popula on, thought should be given to increase the supply of higher-density residen al op ons especially within walkable town centers … Only Līhu‘e [currently] has R-8 zoning that could provide flexible higher density op ons in-between a typical single-family experience and a higher-density development. All districts have mul -family zoning, but could perhaps use more or integrate into mixed-use zoning categories that may emerge in the future, par cularly Līhu‘e and East Kauaʻi.

The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan contains a current assessment of housing needs. The 2014 Kaua‘i Community Health Improvement Plan, corroborates housing was a cri cal theme. Its findings are supported by the data contained in the 2011 Hawai`i Housing Planning Study and the 2015 Land Use Buildout Technical Report.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Affordable and Workforce Housing include:


JULY 2015 43

• Regulatory means - like the Workforce Housing Ordinance, 201H, more mixed use zoning at higher densi es, and the like - can expedite or force the produc on of housing, and create an environment that lowers the cost of construc on.

• The Housing Agency can be further supported in its efforts to seek funds that supplement the County’s budget in order to build affordable housing, and offer homeownership programs and rehabilita on loan programs.

• DHHL owns significant amounts of land on which affordable housing for na ve Hawaiian families can be built. A TDR Ordinance could facilitate the construc on of DHHL homes closer to exis ng infrastructure and town centers.

• A more holis c approach to reducing the cost of living includes not only the produc on of affordable housing, but also reducing transporta on and energy costs.

8.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED HOUSING

• The “Housing” sec on within the 2000 GP was based on informa on that is now outdated. It will require extensive upda ng. Informa on is largely available to accomplish that.

• Based on popula on projec ons of an annual growth rate of 3.8 % (between 1980 and 1990), the 2000 GP emphasized the need to produce housing, and integrated support services, for the elderly.

• The 2000 GP recommended revising the CZO, as necessary, to facilitate the development of assisted living units and con nuing care communi es serving the elderly. While the CZO has not yet been revised, the County has par cipated on State-Wide Assisted Living Facili es Task Force.


Work on housing to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Much of the needed data is readily available in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan, 2014 Rental Study, and 2014 Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report.

2) Update the policies and ac ons contained in the 2000 General Plan from current sources. 3) The GP planning process can vet variety of regulatory, financial and programma c recommenda ons

that might be ini ated by the Housing Agency or others. 4) Describe housing needs (including those of the elderly, special needs, young families, etc.) / goals /

poten al ac ons from 2016 to 2035. 5) Iden fy the regula ons that can support affordable housing construc on. 6) Obtain data indica ng to what degree accessory dwelling units are sa sfying affordable rental needs,

if such data exists. 7) Determine how to expedite the leveraging of Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, Sec 8 Vouchers,

Economic Development Ini a ves, USDA Rural Dev, private founda ons, State CIP, and County funds. 8) Iden fy affordable housing projects that will expire before 2035. Determine how the buy-back

program can be improved. 9) Iden fy how the private sector can play a larger role in producing affordable housing. 10) Consider improvements to the Affordable Workforce Housing Ordinance. 11) Consider crea ng an index for Kaua‘i called the HTE index (“Housing, Transporta on, Electricity” that

builds on the CNT’s H+T Index) to illustrate how severe the cost of living problem is in Kaua‘i. 12) Update Table 8-1: Household Composi on using data from Table 7 pertaining to Housing Units in the

Socioeconomic Technical Report. 13) Update Table 8-2: Kaua’i Income Distribu on, using US Census data.


JULY 2015 44

14) Update Table 8-3: Shelter-to-Income Ra os, using Hawaii Housing Policy Study, 2003, Table IV-A-7. Shelter-to-Income Ra os, August 23, 2003 and the 2011 Hawaii Housing Planning Study, Table 5: Shelter-to-Income Ra o.

8.5 RESOURCES

PBR Hawai’i & Associates, Inc. 2014. Dra Land Use Buildout Analysis.

County of Kaua‘i Built Environment Task Force. February 2015. Evalua on of Public Health Policies in the General Plan 2000.

County of Kauaʻi, Kauaʻi County Housing Agency. April 2015. Consolidated Plan 2015-2020.

County of Kaua‘i. in progress. Affordable Housing Inventory.

SMS Research & Marke ng Services, Inc. November 2011. Hawai`i Housing Planning Study, 2011 Prepared for the County of Kaua‘i.


JULY 2015 45

9.0 NATURAL HAZARDS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 9.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Kaua’i is suscep ble to a variety of natural hazards, including coastal storms, hurricanes, high wave events, flooding, coastal erosion, tsunamis, drought, wildfire, landslides and vog.

All of these hazards threaten lives, property, the natural environment, and the economy. While li le can be done to prevent hazard events, their adverse impacts can be reduced through proper planning.

Climate change is an important public health and safety factor that needs to be considered when developing policies for the loca on and pa ern of development. Exis ng hazards will be exacerbated by climate change and sea-level rise. Based on the best available science, a range of sea-level rise of 1 foot by 2050 and 3 feet by 2100 is a reasonable, and possibly even conserva ve, planning target for Kaua‘i and other Hawaiian Islands. This is consistent with recommenda ons from the University of Hawai‘i Sea Grant College Program Center for Island Climate Adapta on and Policy (ICAP) report tled Sea- Level Rise and Coastal Land Use in Hawai‘i: A Policy Tool Kit for State and Local Governments and the State of Hawai‘i Ocean Resources Management Plan.

It is important to note that scien fic studies also suggest high end sea level rise scenarios upwards of 6 feet by 2100. The Na onal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra on’s high end scenario of 6.6 feet is based on projec ons that use a calcula on of the maximum possible glacier and ice sheet loss by the end of the century. At this stage the greatest uncertainty surrounding projec ons of future global SLR is the rate and magnitude of ice sheet loss, primarily from Greenland and West Antarc ca.

Given the range of uncertainty, NOAA and UH Sea Grant (through the Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment) recommend a scenario-based planning approach, whereby planning decisions consider mul ple future scenarios and response op ons, where the highest scenario should be considered in situa ons where there is li le tolerance for risk (e.g. new infrastructure with a long an cipated life cycle such as a power plant), and the lowest scenario should be considered when there is a great tolerance for risk.

Climate change, and in par cular sea-level rise, has the poten al to adversely impact coastal communi es, cri cal infrastructure, agricultural produc vity, recrea on and access to natural and human-made recrea onal facili es, cultural resources, natural habitats, tourism, and other economic sectors. It can poten ally threaten the health and safety of residents and tourists. Twenty percent of Kaua‘i’s residents live near the shoreline. Low-lying roads, wastewater systems, energy facili es, stormwater systems, and docking facili es in harbors will be at risk of impaired func on due to the collec ve hazards of climate change and sea-level rise.

Climate change and sea level rise will affect important natural habitats, many of which provide essen al natural hazard buffers for communi es, including beaches, dunes, wetlands, and rivers. Inunda on and


JULY 2015 46

erosion from SLR will reduce habitats and/or convert habitats from one type to another, including sandy beaches and rocky inter dal areas. While new wetlands may be created due to the rise in the groundwater table (if adequate land area is available), saltwater intrusion could occur in exis ng aqua c ecosystems, including wetlands, streams, and estuarine systems, changing their character and vastly affec ng the species that depend on them. This calls for the need to iden fy and map environmental systems that protect development from natural hazards and examine exis ng habitat protec on policies and strengthen them, if needed. See Chapter 15 of the Kaua'i Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment for more informa on.

Kaua‘i’s landmark beaches are of great importance to residents and the visitor industry. Beaches are cri cal cultural and social gathering places. Beach erosion will increase as sea levels rise. Beach nourishment can be used to restore beaches and reduce property loss from erosion, but the high cost of these projects generally limits them to beaches of high economic importance.

Sea-level rise could also lead to an increase of flooding and inunda on of low lying agricultural land, salt water intrusion into agricultural and potable drinking water supplies, and a decrease in the amount of freshwater available. In addi on to the coastal hazards, agriculture will be affected by drought, possible increases in storm intensity, and changes in rainfall pa erns.

Coastal Hazards

The Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment was prepared in 2014 to support the GP Update. It iden fies exis ng coastal hazards and climate change effects that are expected to increase on Kaua‘i into the future, and suggests measures for adapta on, resiliency, and mi ga on.

The key coastal hazard impacts to consider for Kaua‘i are: (1) coastal flooding and wave inunda on; (2) erosion; (3) inland (stream) flooding, and (4) wind. These impacts may be the result of one or more hazard events including storms, high surf, sea level rise, sediment (sand) budget deficits, etc. Proper planning and mi ga on programs, however, should be designed around these key impacts and not just the event that causes them,

Coastal Flooding and Wave Inunda on

Coastal flooding is the flooding of normally dry, low lying coastal land. It can be caused by elevated sea surfaces or large dal fluctua ons, seasonal high waves that push water inland, and surge from low pressure systems, tropical cyclones, and tsunamis.

The Atlas of Natural Hazards in the Hawaiian Coastal Zone and the County of Kaua‘i Hazard Mi ga on Plan iden fies notable high wave events, not including tsunamis, from the early 1900s through the late 1990s, many of which caused beach erosion and overwash, and damaged structures. The largest wave events typically occur on the north shore due to strong storms in the North Pacific, but the south, east, and west shores also have significant wave events.

Hurricanes with large wave heights and storm surge have historically caused extensive erosion and property damage, including Hurricanes Nina (1957), Iwa (1982), and Iniki (1992). Surge from Iniki caused severe damage to the Po‘ipū coast where the greatest inunda on occurred.

The recorded history of Hawaiian tsunamis shows that 26 large tsunamis have made landfall within the islands and eight have had significant damaging effects on Kaua‘i. There are many examples of tsunami inunda on on Kaua‘i that demonstrate the magnitude and variability of tsunami impact on the shoreline. During the 1946 tsunami on the north shore, Hā‘ena had a runup height of 45 feet, while only a few miles away in Hanalei Bay, runup was 19 feet. Tsunami Evacua on Zone Maps that are based on historical


JULY 2015 47

tsunami runup and hypothe cal models of near and far source tsunami runup are available from the Kaua‘i Civil Defense Agency.

Understanding how climate related changes will affect coastal flooding and wave inunda on is an area of ac ve research. In general, extreme water levels will occur when sea level rise combines with seasonal high des, interannual and interdecadal sea level varia ons, and surge and/or high runup associated with storms and tsunamis.

To visualize future inunda on from sea-level rise, data from the NOAA Digital Coast sea level rise viewer provides a “bathtub” model of sea level rise inunda on for Kaua‘i. There are mapped inunda on scenarios for 0 to 6 feet of sea level rise. Some notable limita ons of these maps are that increases in water levels from wave runup is not evaluated and they do not predict the poten al for increased coastal erosion. These maps may be used in the general planning process as a preliminary screening tool for SLR inunda on hazards to iden fy areas where future adapta on planning efforts should be focused, such as conduc ng detailed hazard, risk, and vulnerability assessments.

Coastal Erosion

Historical erosion studies using shoreline posi ons mapped from aerial photographs and survey charts show that beach erosion is a troubling trend leading to shoreline change on Kaua‘i, overall. The Na onal Assessment of Shoreline Change: Historical Shoreline Change in the Hawaiian Islands reports that 71% of beaches on Kaua‘i are eroding, with nearly 4 miles of beach completely lost to erosion over the past century. On average, shorelines on Kaua‘i retreated over 36 feet over the past century. Beaches on the north and east coasts of Kaua‘i are experiencing the most erosion (76% and 78% of beaches, respec vely). The majority of beaches are also eroding on the south and west coasts (63% and 64% of beaches, respec vely). In addi on to long-term or chronic erosion, Hawai‘i beaches are also highly prone to erosion from seasonal high waves and storms.

The observed erosion trends can generally be explained by a combina on of causes, including:

1. Human impacts to sand supply: In Hawai‘i, human impacts that have notably contributed to erosion and/or beach loss include the prac ce of shoreline hardening (seawalls and revetments) to protect development built too close to the shoreline and sand mining. 2. Seasonal and storm waves and wave-driven currents that move sand, and 3. Sea-level rise forcing shoreline retreat.

Sea level has been rising globally and around the Hawaiian Islands over the last century or longer. Sea level has risen about 6 inches around Kaua‘i over the past century. Rates of sea-level rise (SLR), globally and locally around Hawai‘i, are expected to accelerate over this century. SLR leads to shoreline retreat through two processes: 1) by simply moving the water line up the coastal slope and 2) by increasing erosional effects of waves on the upper beach, dune, or cliff. Expected future increases in sea level will result in increases to historical erosion rates and will add pressure to already eroding beaches and beaches that were previously stable. Some predic ons show that average erosion rates at Hawai‘i beaches will double by the year 2050. Mapping of future shoreline posi on on Kaua‘i under accelerated sea level rise scenarios is currently underway by researchers from the University of Hawai‘i Coastal Geology Group.

Inland (Stream) Flooding

There are instances on Kaua‘i of intense flooding associated with runoff, mudslides, bank failures, dam breaches, and erosion. Some have caused deaths and millions of dollars in property damages. The 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment suggests that the primary challenge to mi ga ng


JULY 2015 48

the hazard due to stream flooding is one of obtaining adequate warning in the case of flash floods and in improved planning of developments in areas of known flood history. The County of Kaua‘i Hazard Mi ga on Plan lists stream flooding events from the late 1800s through 2009.

Some future projec ons suggest that more frequent extreme rain events could lead to impacts from inland flooding including landslides and slope failure, coastal erosion, and runoff. In the future, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that climate changes in the Equatorial (Tropical) Pacific are expected to cause an increase in precipita on. However, Hawai‘i falls at the northern edge of the tropic zone and may not experience the described trends. Historically, annual rainfall has decreased in Hawai‘i and this is reflected in decreased groundwater discharge to streams. Also, all four major Hawaiian Islands have experienced more severe droughts since the 1950s. However, rainfall pa erns in Hawai‘i vary drama cally both temporally and spa ally based on trade winds, topography, mid-la tude weather systems, storms and cyclones, the El Niño Southern Oscilla on (ENSO) phases, and more. This natural variability along with future climate changes presents a challenge to predict future rainfall and runoff pa erns.

Water supply faces threats both from rising groundwater and saltwater intrusion in wells, as well as decline in quality and quan ty due to drought and downward trends in groundwater base flows. The water table rises as sea level rises, and it will eventually break the land surface crea ng and expanding wetlands, changing drainage pa erns, satura ng the soil, and causing increased flooding. This could cause problems with water supply infrastructure, including aquifer saliniza on and flooding of facili es. These will be costly to mi gate on an ongoing basis.

Wind

Strong winds throughout the Hawaiian Islands are associated with strong trade wind events, Kona storms, and tropical storms and hurricanes. Kaua‘i in par cular has a history of wind events associated hurricanes that have been excep onally damaging, including Hurricanes Dot in August 1959, Iwa in November 1982, and Iniki in 199228. Hurricane Dot packed sustained winds of 75 mph with gusts of 165 mph as it passed directly over Kaua‘i. While the storm-generated surf was not par cularly damaging, the 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment reports that winds and flooding led to $5.5-6 million in agricultural losses and hundreds of houses and trees were damaged. Hurricanes Iwa and Iniki both produced high waves ranging 20-30 . in addi on to winds over 125 mph. Redevelopment in the same areas that were impacted by those events raises the risk of damage from future storms. The County of Kaua‘i Hazard Mi ga on Plan provides a table (Chapter 3, Table 3-2) of hurricane and strong wind events from the early 1900s through 2009. 9.2 Opportuni es

The Hawaii State Planning Act (HRS Chapter 226) sets priority guidelines and requires that coun es consider sea level rise in planning processes. In 2014, Hawaii adopted the Hawaii Climate Adapta on Ini a ve Act 83 (HRS §225P-3) to address the effects of climate change to protect the State’s economy, health, environment, and way of life. The Act established an Interagency Climate Adapta on Commi ee (ICAC) comprised of key agency directors, legislators, and subject ma er experts, of which Kaua‘i County Planning Department is a part.

Addressing coastal hazards associated with climate change does not always require the adop on of brand new programs, ordinances, or statutes. Kaua‘i County already has a broad regulatory and planning framework that can cover the four major hazard categories: (1) erosion; (2) wave inunda on; (3) flooding; and (4) wind. The degree to which those hazards are addressed or factor in new scien fic informa on such as SLR can be analyzed and adjusted. Opportuni es for program adjustment include the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), CZO, Subdivision Ordinance, Special Management Area (SMA) Rules and


JULY 2015 49

Regula ons, Floodplain Management Ordinance, the building codes, and the Kaua‘i Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preserva on Fund.

Kauaʻi has already begun working on planning for climate change. The Special Management Area permit process is a useful tool for coastal policies and design standards, but there are other ways by which vulnerable physical assets can be protected. The County’s revised shoreline setback ordinance is an example of poten al regulatory improvements. Ordinance 979 increased shoreline setbacks by 20 feet to account for episodic events, sea level rise, and other hazards.

The 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment report includes six major recommenda ons, several of which speak to gathering more informa on and incorpora ng hazard planning into County policies and regula ons. It offers recommenda ons for strengthening exis ng programs – including floodplain management, shoreline setback ordinance, the SMA process, environmental reviews, subdivision regula ons, building codes, the Public Access Funds, and CIP. It recommends new programs such as tax incen ves and transfer of development rights to help locate or relocate development outside of hazardous or sensi ve areas. It recommends a comprehensive beach management strategy and financing plan for beach and dune maintenance.

Sec on III of the Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment iden fies the gaps in planning informa on and guidance to adequately address climate change related hazards, protect health and safety of Hawai‘i’s communi es, and protect coastal resources. This includes how accelerated SLR will affect erosion rates, how SLR and associated erosion will effect wave inunda on, and how to address an Aleu an Island earthquake event and tsunami impacts. Therefore, the first recommenda on of the Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment is for the GP to acknowledge and support the genera on of this informa on.

Fortunately, some of the above-men oned research is underway at the University of Hawai‘i and other research ins tu ons.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Climate Change and Natural Hazards include:

• The State’s Planning Act, HRS Chapter 226, and County’s Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan (2010) provide the framework for ac on; and, Kaua‘i has already begun revising regula ons, like the shoreline setback ordinance, to be er protect its people, and natural and built environment.

The Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment recommenda ons fall into six broad categories:

1. Support the development of improved climate related hazard planning informa on. 2. Conduct detailed coastal hazard, risk, and vulnerability assessments based on best available climate change science. 3. Include relevant background informa on and maps for climate change related coastal hazards in the General Plan. 4. Incorporate addi onal General Plan overarching goals/principles pertaining to planning for climate change related coastal hazards. 5. Use exis ng planning and regulatory programs to address climate change related coastal hazards. 6. Develop new programma c strategies to address climate change related coastal hazards.


JULY 2015 50

• Kaua‘i has the authority to implement change through its zoning code, subdivision regula ons, SMA process, floodplain management, and building codes.

• Kaua‘i can con nue to use its CIP, Public Trust Funds, and other sources of money and financial incen ves to prevent new construc on near the shoreline or encourage construc on elsewhere.

• The energies and poli cal will of community watchdog groups can help further ac on to make Kaua‘i more resilient.

• The con nued genera on of important planning informa on from research ins tu ons, which can inform future Hazard, Risk, and Vulnerability Assessments.

The County is undertaking significant efforts to build Kaua‘i’s resilience against natural hazards. The Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan for Kaua‘i is currently being updated. The County of Kaua‘i’s Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan was formally approved in December 2003 as one of the first county plans in the United States to receive approval in accordance with the Federal Disaster Mi ga on Act of 2000, 44 CFR Part 201, Hazard Mi ga on Planning, and was updated in 2010. The 2010 Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan goals are to:

• Implement, refine, and revise the Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan based on updates of the risk and vulnerability assessments.

• Engage in disaster public awareness ac vi es that improve implementa on of the plan, building on the network of the hazard mi ga on community at local levels and throughout the State.

• Improve communica ons systems. • Ensure that adequate shelter is available to all residents and visitors. • Secure and maintain lifelines and access for medical assistance and transport of materials and

fuel. • Enhance and use the County’s geographic informa on system (GIS) and data to improve planning,

permi ng, and building such that disaster risks are reduced. • Harden essen al and governmental facili es to maintain opera ons during a disaster and

recovery opera ons.

The Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan is being updated as this Issues and Opportuni es Paper is being wri en. The 2015 dra update can be found at: h p://www.hazards-climate-environment.org/Kaua’i

To summarize, the major issues in Hazard Preparedness and Climate Change Effects include:

• Natural hazards and their more frequent occurrences can be expected as a result of climate change and sea-level rise.

• Twenty percent of Kaua‘i’s residents live near the shoreline. Located on, or near, the shoreline are many of Kaua‘i’s cri cal heritage sites, natural resources, tourist facili es, and infrastructure.

• Climate change is an important public health and safety factor that needs to be considered when developing policies for the loca on and pa ern of development.

In June of 2015, Mayor Bernard Carvalho signed an Execu ve Order to Sustain the County of Kaua‘i as a Disaster Resilient Community through a comprehensive mi ga on program against natural hazards. It calls for mi ga on measures to be implemented that significantly reduce the vulnerabili es and risks associated with inland and coastal flooding, high winds and surf, drought, wildfires, tsunamis, and earthquakes. Fourteen measures are outlined to support hazard mi ga on and resilience. These are summarized in the text box below.


JULY 2015 51

The dra County of Kaua‘i Mul -Hazard Mi ga on and Resilience Plan, 2015 Update aims to focus efforts on longer term goals of resiliency that ensure that the County will be able to withstand hazards and recover quickly when they occur. The Plan seeks to align with exis ng County-level plans and ini a ves to further its goals, including the Mayor’s Holo Holo 2020 ini a ve and the General Plan Update. One of its objec ves, with two associated measures, specifically reference the General Plan Update:

Objec ve 2.5: Align the General Plan update process with disaster risk reduc on measures.

Measure: General Plan acknowledges hazard risks and iden fies growth and development in areas of least harm or poten al disaster impact.

Measure: Review of General Plan for risk reduc on relevant plans, policies and measures and incorpora on of ac ons and recommenda ons.

Measures Iden fied in “An Execu ve Order to Sustain Kaua‘i County as Disaster Resilient Community”, Mayor Bernard Carvalho, June 19, 2015

1. Support and implementa on of the Kauai County Hazard Mi ga on and Resiliency Plan.

2. Countywide risk and vulnerability assessment, and assist communi es to develop and implement community resiliency plans.

3. Partnerships with businesses to provide a public-private link for coordinated disaster mi ga on, preparedness, response and recovery.

4. Support adop on of the latest version of the Interna onal Building Code (IBC) and relevant wind load and seismic provisions.

5. Address hazards and the risks they pose in county-level land-use decisions, including county-owned property development.

6. Maintain a county emergency response plan and develop a county post-disaster recovery and mi ga on plan.

7. Compliance, par cipa on, and improvement of current ra ngs in the Na onal Flood Insurance Program, the Fire Suppression Ra ng System, the Building Code Effec veness Grading

Schedule (BCEGS), and any other natural hazard-related ra ng or regulatory system.

8. Incorporate disaster protec on into public and private lifelines, infrastructure and cri cal facili es.

9. Develop and support programs to increase the public's awareness of natural hazards and ways to reduce or prevent damage through a coordinated effort with mul ple stakeholders.

10. Support incorpora on of natural hazard awareness and reduc on programs in school curricula.

11. Support mi ga on training for planners, developers, architects, engineers and surveyors, and County personnel. Encourage par cipa on of government, industry and professional organiza ons.

12. Iden fy exis ng incen ves and disincen ves for hazard loss reduc on ac ons, and develop and implement new incen ves and disincen ves.

13. Support the requirement of con nuing educa on of building officials and contractors.

14. Support consistency among projects, programs, and plans in the County that build resilience to the impacts of disasters and climate change, follow "no-regrets" approaches to risk reduc on, and reduce risk for everyone, including the visitor popula ons, in the County.


JULY 2015 52

Given the interest in aligning County-level plans and policies to support resilience, there is an opportunity for the General Plan Update to benefit from this recent work and incorporate relevant informa on and recommenda ons into its policies.

9.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED CLIMATE CHANGE AND NATURAL HAZARDS

The topic of Climate Change and Natural Hazards was not raised in the 2000 GP. The primary source of data for the GP update will come from the County of Kaua‘i’s Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan and 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment. The 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment report includes specific recommenda ons and policies that will require CAC and community input.


Work on climate change and hazard preparedness to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Discuss the 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment report with the CAC, and determine how best to incorporate the findings and recommenda ons into the GP Update. Iden fy the 2014 Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment implica ons on land use, housing, economic development, infrastructure, and natural resources. Discuss with the County Agencies and others.

2) Certain hazards, including tsunami evacua on and inunda on areas, will be mapped and included in the GP.

3) The General Plan will incorporate informa on from the 2015 update of the County of Kaua‘i Mul -Hazard Mi ga on and Resilience Plan in its discussions and policies related to natural hazards.

4) Once the planning informa on is available, the Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazards Assessment recommends the County conduct detailed Hazard, Risk, and Vulnerability Assessments incorpora ng sea level rise impacts, as an adapta on planning step for vulnerable planning areas. Such assessment(s) are outside the scope of the GP Update. It is recommended to include:

a) A hazard assessment that iden fies the extent, magnitude, and frequency of the hazard. Hazards to consider include: erosion (and accelerated erosion due to SLR as the models become available), wave inunda on, flooding (including SLR inunda on and groundwater penetra on), tsunami inunda on and wind;

b) A risk and vulnerability assessment that iden fies priority community assets’ exposure to the hazard, sensi vity to exposure, and ability to cope/adap ve capacity. Such assets should include at a minimum: cri cal infrastructure, transporta on systems, u li es, exis ng popula on centers, water supplies and future growth areas. Other community assets to consider include important agricultural lands, sensi ve ecosystems, public access/ recrea on areas, and cultural resources. This assessment could also iden fy poten al pollutant sources at risk of inunda on due to SLR, including waste disposal sites, ocean ou alls and wastewater treatment facili es, as well as aquifers and wells at risk of saltwater intrusion;

c) Iden fying priority planning areas where resources and planning efforts need to be focused and iden fy how and where to use adapta on strategies such as accommoda on, retreat, and protec on;

d) Encouraging strategic retreat and reloca on to safer areas based on the results of the assessments above;

e) Iden fying lands/areas that may serve as buffer from coastal hazards; “growth boundaries” may be used to restrict development from hazard-prone areas.


JULY 2015 53

9.5 RESOURCES

Anderson, Tiffany R., Fletcher, Charles H., Barbee, Ma hew M., Frazer, Neil, Romine, Bradley M. 2015. Doubling of coastal erosion under rising sea level by mid-century in Hawai‘i. In: Natural Hazards volume 76. ISSN 0921-030X.

County of Kaua‘i. 2010. Mul -Hazard Mi ga on Plan, 2010 Update.

County of Kaua‘i. 2015. County of Kaua‘i Mul -Hazard Mi ga on and Resilience Plan – DRAFT Review and Comment. h p://www.hazards-climate-environment.org/Kaua’i

University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program. June 2014. Kaua‘i Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment.

State of Hawai’i Department of Defense. August 2013. State of Hawai’i Mul - Hazard Mi ga on Plan 2013 Update.

Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adapta on Report (2017) [in process]

Fletcher, C.H., Grossman, E.E., Richmond, B.M., Gibbs, A.E., 2002. Atlas of Natural Hazards in the Hawaiian Coastal Zone. U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Inves ga ons Series I-2761.

Codiga, D. and Wager, K. 2011. Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Land Use in Hawai‘i: A Policy Tool Kit for State and Local Governments. Center for Island Climate Adapta on and Policy. Honolulu, HI. Available at h p://icap.seagrant.soest.hawaii.edu/icap-publica ons.

Hawai‘i Coastal Zone Management Program. 2013. Hawai‘i Ocean Resources Management Plan. h p://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/op/czm/ormp/ormp_update_reports/final_ormp_2013.pdf

Romine, Bradley M., Fletcher, Charles H., Barbee, Ma hew M., Anderson, Tiffany R., Frazer, L. Neil. 2013. Are Beach Erosion Rates and Sea-Level Rise Related in Hawai‘i? In: Global and Planetary Change 108 (2013) 149-157.


JULY 2015 54



JULY 2015 55

10.0 INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES This Chapter discusses four types of Infrastructure needed for development: Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste and Drainage. Transporta on and Energy are typically included under Infrastructure, but they have their own Chapters in this Issues and Opportuni es paper.

The 2000 GP was well organized in its discussion of infrastructure and easy to follow. Where available, it provides a descrip on of the exis ng system, new facili es needed (by 2020), status of long range plans, policies, and implemen ng ac ons. This is an excellent format to con nue in the update of the GP.

This Chapter of the Issues and Opportuni es Paper is organized differently than the others in this paper. It looks at the four categories of infrastructure and discusses what was in the 2000 General Plan, what was addi onal or updated informa on from the 2015 technical study on General Plan Update Kaua‘i Infrastructure Analysis (2015) prepared by R.M. Towill.

All subject areas are treated together for Implica ons for the General Plan Update. This includes discussion on funding sources, including user fees as presented in another technical study, Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study by Group 70 Interna onal (August 2014)

The biggest piece of informa on that is missing is disaggrega on of infrastructure data on demand and capacity according to the six planning districts. Poten al growth areas need to be jus fied by the ability of current systems to support buildout together with opportuni es for the system to expand to allow for addi onal growth. The General Plan will need to provide informa on on the following ques ons:

• What is the exis ng capacity in each Planning District? • What is the demand forecast by Planning District based on popula on growth scenarios? • What are the gaps in infrastructure and how might they be filled? • What are the approaches to priori zing infrastructure dollars and/or raising new revenues?

10.1 DESCRIPTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE ON KAUA‘I

Water

The 2000 General Plan describes that water is supplied by both public and private en es. There are thirteen service areas, each served by a single system or linked sub-systems. The Department of Water, a semi-autonomous agency, supplies water for domes c use and sells water to 300 agriculture users (who independently own and operate their water systems). Private water systems include one in Princeville and one at the Pacific Missile Firing Range.

As of 1999, the Department of Water maintained 52 separate groundwater sources (wells, sha s, and tunnels). It had 46 storage tanks with a capacity of 18.5 million gallons. There were 16 booster pump sta ons. Average demand was 10.6 MGD with maximum or peak demand of 15.9 MGD. Even at that me (2000) many systems operated at or near capacity and most needed to be expanded. Therefore DOW


JULY 2015 56

placed opera onal restric ons on requests for new service. Payment of a “Facility Reserve Charge” by a developer would obligate DOW to reserve capacity. One meter is the equivalent of 500 GPD supply, the amount of water needed for a single family dwelling.

The amount of recharge to Kaua’i aquifers was 652 MGD. There was li le threat of exceeding sustainable yields. No area was declared a Ground Water Management Area by the State Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM). The Table below from the 2000 General Plan shows municipal water systems as of 1998.

STATUS OF KAUA‘I MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS AS OF 1998

Water System or Sub-System

Water Source Availability1

Water Storage Availability1

Current Restric ons2

Kekaha Near Capacity Adequate Large Projects

Waimea AT CAPACITY Adequate 1 Meter per Lot

Hanapēpē AT CAPACITY Adequate Large Projects

‘Ele‘ele Adequate Adequate Large Projects

Kalāheo Adequate Adequate ----

Lāwai-‘Ōma‘o Adequate AT CAPACITY 2 Meters per Lot

Kōloa Adequate Adequate ----

Pō‘ipū Adequate AT CAPACITY 2 Meters per Lot

Puhi AT CAPACITY Adequate 1 Meter per Lot

Līhu‘e-Hanamā‘ulu AT CAPACITY Adequate 3 Meters per Lot

Wailuā Homesteads Near Capacity Adequate ----

Upper Wailuā Near Capacity Near Capacity 2 Meters per Lot

Wailuā-Kapa‘a Hmstds.

Adequate Adequate ----

Anahola AT CAPACITY AT CAPACITY No Meters Available

Moloaa AT CAPACITY AT CAPACITY No Meters Available

Kīlauea, East Near Capacity AT CAPACITY 1 Meter per Lot

Kīlauea-Kalihiwai Near Capacity AT CAPACITY 5 Meters per Lot

‘Anini AT CAPACITY AT CAPACITY 1 Meter per Lot

Hanalei Near Capacity Adequate ---

Wainiha-Hā‘ena Near Capacity AT CAPACITY 3 Meters per Lot


JULY 2015 57

Līhu‘e is the sole area constrained by lack of new groundwater sources. Developers such as Grove Farm have been required to provide water source, transmission and storage as a condi on of zoning. Use of surface water would require treatment plants. Expansion in the North Shore requires development of new sources, and improvements to transmission and storage. Princeville Corpora on was planning such improvements as of 2000.

Water Use and Development Plans are prepared by Coun es as part of the Hawaii Water Plan (required under HRS Chapter 174c). The DOW prepared their Use and Development Plan and it was adopted by CWRM. Water planning mandate is broad and it was speculated in the 2000 General Plan that the County would need funding from the State to complete all required plans. In 1999, a 20-year Master Plan was underway addressing exis ng and future needs, CIP, capital rehabilita on and a rate study.

Policies and ac ons for water in the 2000 General Plan focus on comple ng a long range plan and coordina ng it with the GP policies. Compact development was to be given priority along with established agriculture communi es.

The latest Water Plan is the Water Plan 2020 (2001) completed shortly a er the 2000 GP. It projects to 2050. Currently the DOW has 20,500 customers, 13 service areas. The two private systems at Princeville and the Pacific Missile Range s ll exist.

Waiahi Water Company, a division of Grove Farms along with DOW developed the Kapaia Reservoir as a water source. In 2005 they opened a water purifica on plant that draws water through Hanamā’ulu Ditch into a treatment system. The capacity is 3.0 MGD and it serves 15,000 customers. DOW purchases some of this water. Poten al upgrades to expand capacity by 60% would cost $8.13 Million, or $31.7 Million if they double capacity.

Princeville system provides 1.18 MGD for nearly 1700 residents. This system includes three wells, ver cal turbine pumps bringing water to mul ple concrete reinforced tanks. It is a gravity-fed distribu on system. An addi onal well and 1.2 MGD will accommodate future demands.

Pacific Missile Range Facility is owned and operated by the US Navy. That system has 0.42 MGD and 185 service connec ons, all located on base. It serves 1200 people as well as fire protec on.

Overall source and storage deficiencies (as of 2006) are provided in the Infrastructure study (see table on the following page).


JULY 2015 58

OVERALL SOURCE AND STORAGE DEFICIENCIES (AS OF 2006)

Water System Exis ng Source Exis ng Storage DeficiencyKekaha-Waimea Yes (143 gpm) Yes Hanapēpē-‘Ele‘ele No No Kalāheo No Yes Lāwa‘i-‘Ōma‘o No Yes Koloa-Po‘ipū No Yes Puhi-Līhu‘e-Hanamā’ulu No No Wailuā-Kapa’a No Yes Anahola Yes (111 gpm) No Moloa‘a N/A (no DOW-owned Yes Kilauea-Waipake- Kalihiwai Yes (93 gpm) Yes ‘Anini N/A (no DOW-owned N/A (no DOW-owned storage)Hanalei Yes Yes

Wainiha-Hā‘ena Yes (67 gpm) Yes Source: General Plan Update Kaua‘i Infrastructure Analysis (2015). RM Towill.

Other issues include the transmission lines. Of the nearly 400 miles, 237 miles were installed between 1921 and 1980. They need replacement due to age, deteriora on, or inadequate size. The DOW CIP lists 46 projects totaling $148 Million; these are broken down by service area. The CIP is 21% for source development, 23% for storage, and 20% for transmission deficiencies. Capacity increases are assumed to be addressed as deficiencies are replaced.

Part of the gap in informa on is in regard to the CIP Phases 1 and 2 are already in the past, but what happened? The DOW states it will prepare the 2040 Water Plan a er the Kaua‘i General Plan is updated, so it is unlikely that updated informa on will be available for this GP update.

Wastewater

Kaua‘i has two types of wastewater service: County sewer and Individual Wastewater Systems (IWS) such as cesspools and sep c tank systems. Both are regulated by the State Department of Health. The 2000 General Plan noted there were no environmental threats due to waste disposal. Those systems that fail or experience problems use commercial pumping.

The municipal system has exis ng capacity, but it is already reserved. See the table on the next page.


JULY 2015 59

STATUS OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS ON KAUA‘I

Waimea Waimea Was .3

MGD/ Now .7 MGD

R-1 At full capacity Does not serve Kekaha

‘Ele‘ele Hanapēpē, ‘Ele‘ele, Port Allen

.8 MGD R-2 At half capacity Needs to expand to Hanapepe

Līhu‘e Proper es along Kapule Highway, Kūhiō Highway, Ahukini Rd and Rice St.

2.5 MGD R-1 At half capacity Funding needed for collec on and transmission systems

Wailuā Kapa’a, Palaloa, Waipouli, Wailua

1.5 MGD R-2 At half capacity Needs collec on system

There were over 300 private sewer treatment plants, many at hotels and for master planned communi es. Some complexes operate package treatment plants. All other areas have IWSs. Department of Health regula ons now require sep c tank systems and treatment for any project over fi y units. The trend has been for developers to solve their wastewater needs, and not rely on the municipal systems.

The 1993 Water Quality Management Plan discusses the need for regional systems in Koloa Town and in Poipu to avoid ocean pollu on. The DPW had no plans for future plant expansion. The 2000 GP provided an assessment of wastewater needs, area by area. Pursuit of strategic opportuni es and priori es is recommended un l a more comprehensive plan is prepared

Policies focus on collec on to safeguard the public health; re-use of effluent for irriga on, and using graywater. The plan calls for addressing use of unused capacity by preparing a long range wastewater policy plan which is to be updated every five years.

Much has changed from the 2000 General Plan. The details of those changes are well described in the 2015 Kaua‘i Infrastructure Analysis. The major caveat to that statement is that, the facility service plans only go to either year 2020 or 2025, not 2035, which is the forecast year for the update General Plan.

The four municipal wastewater systems were all constructed in the 1970s. They consist of gravity flow pipelines, manholes, pump sta ons, force mains and the treatment plant.

• The Waimea WWTP was recently upgraded to R-1 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor facility with a design capacity of .7 MGD. Due to the upgrade, there are no major equipment deficiencies. The next phase of improvements will upgrade the distribu on system and expand the Kekaha sewer system.

• Eleele WWTP u lizes an ac vated sludge process for the .6 MGD daily flow (capacity is .8 MGD). Plans are to modify and expand the facility by year 2025. The expansion would allow daily treatment flow to 1.2 MGD. Deficiencies include lack of a backup power generator, lack of explosion proof conduits, and other power needs.


JULY 2015 60

• Lihue WWTP near the airport is opera ng at half capacity. Deficiencies include the need to replace the gas chlorina on system, bio-filter re-circula on pump, and the aera on system. In addi on, the Haleko Pump Sta on should be replaced and sewer lines added for Ulu Mahi/Pua Loke, for Nāwiliwili/Kupolo, and for Kapaia.

• Wailua WWTP has a design flow of 1.5 MGD but actual capacity is 1.0 MGD. The head works facility does not work properly and needs replacement. The Rapid Bloc Ac vated Sludge system does not work and needs replacement. A new pump sta on is needed and the collec on system should be extended.

The four municipal WWTP each have service plans to the year 2020 or 2025. These will need to be updated following the General Plan comple on and taken to 2035. The Planning District aggrega on needs to be matched with development assump ons for growth.

Upgrade and renova on costs have been es mated for short term, mid term, and long term. They include:

Waimea: $36.8 Million for long term

‘Ele‘ele: $15.2 Million to expand to 1.2 MGD; or $26.2 Million to expand to 5.37 MGD and include Hawaiian Homelands areas

Wailuā: Mid Term $15.2 Million to expand to 1.5 MGD; $14.5 Million to expand to 2.0 OR $26 Million to add a second plant.

Līhu‘e: Short term $$22.3 Million to upgrade to R-1; Mid Term $7.6 Million to replace Haleko pump sta on; Long Term $35.6 Million

There are five privately owned WWTP plants. The WWTP in large master planned communi es are opera ng properly with a combined total capacity of over 4 MGD, nearly equaling the municipal capacity. They use a variety of treatment methods and o en use the effluent for golf course irriga on.

• The Puhi Sewer and Water Company is owned by Grove Farm and provides wastewater treatment to Kukui Grove, Puakea, and Puhi, It has a single treatment plant of 1.0 MGD.

• Pacific Missile Range Facility has two wastewater treatment plants. • Kaua’i Beach Resorts has one wastewater treatment plant • Princeville has one to service the hotel, shopping, golf course, and residences • Po’ipū has one, built in 1981 and expanded in 2004. Its effluent is used to irrigate Kiahuna

Golf Course and Koloa Landing Resort.

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS ON KAUA‘I

Treatment Plant Ownership Design Capacity Effluent Quality

Puhi Grove Farm 1.0 mgd R-1 Pacific Missile Range

Facility (PMRF) U.S. Navy North end: 7,500 gpd

South end: 10,000 gpd Secondary

Kaua‘i Beach Resort Assoc. (KBRA)

KBRA 0.1 mgd Secondary

Princeville Princeville 1.5 mgd R-2 Po‘ipū HOH U li es, LLC 0.8 mgd R-1


JULY 2015 61

There are over 5,000 IWS/cesspools on Kaua’i and it is es mated that 12% are failing. The ul mate goal is to eliminate IWS and create connec ons to treatment plants. Wailuā-Kapa’a is an area of serious concern: approximately 4300 residences have cesspools which are no longer allowed by DOH. The recommenda on is to expand the Wailua WWTP to 2.0 MGD. Beyond that, a second WWTP will be needed.

Drainage

The 2000 General Plan lacks a discussion of the drainage system and does not evaluate what facili es will be needed by the 2020 projec on year.

Drainage policies are included, and these are related to policies on watershed protec on and water quality. The County managed urban stormwater runoff through Drainage Standards applied to new developments by DPW. They also must deal with upland runoff from conserva on and agriculture lands. Flood hazards are managed by the Flood Control Ordinance based on FEMA maps. While the 1984 General Plan and the CZO both require a Drainage Master Plan, none existed by 2000. Unwri en policy is to avoid concrete-lined channels.

Drainage problems were described in Wailua-Kapa’a, Nāwiliwili, and Po‘ipū. DPW planned to focus on specific areas rather than prepare a Master Plan. Polices call for limi ng development on steep slopes or shoreline land in flood hazard areas, to focus on most heavily impacted urban watersheds, to use BMP to control nonpoint source pollu on, and to follow certain principles for drainage improvement. Implemen ng ac ons called for the Planning Department to revise the Subdivision Ordinance and CZO and for DPW to iden fy cri cal watersheds for Drainage Plans.

The R.M. Towill General Plan Update Kaua‘i Infrastructure Analysis (2015) provides updated informa on on drainage since the 2000 General Plan. FEMA has revised the Kaua’i County Flood Insurance Study (FIS) to update base flood eleva ons, floodways, special flood hazard areas, and zone designa ons. Tsunami inunda on was re-studied for the en re coastline. FEMA studies flooding sources in eight watersheds

Flooding problems were of three types: stream overflow, tsunami, and hurricanes. Stream overflow is generally caused by debris, flash flooding, stream pa erns, or inadequate or altered drainage facili es. Specific problem areas include:

Hanalei River: overflow onto Kūhiō Highway Anahola Stream: which becomes restricted by a natural sandbar Kapa’a Stream: tsunami and flooding (none documented since Moikeha and Waikea Canals were built) Wailua: channel capacity exceeded Lihue: Flooding on Pū‘ali and Nāwiliwili Streams due in part to sand buildup and debris accumula on Koloa: low lying topography, debris and overgrowth of Waikomo Stream Hanapēpē: Low lying areas behind the levees are prone to flooding West Kaua’i: Flooding aggravated by sand plugs Wainiha: low lying areas, high surf and flash floods

IWS AREAS

Kupolo (Lihue) Ulu Mahi (Lihue) Pockets of Lihue Hanapēpē Heights Por ons of Kekaha Por ons of Kapa‘a near Wailuā Ag and rural mauka of ‘Ele’ele Wailuā to Kapa’a


JULY 2015 62

Waimea: levee system improved the town area, but the low lying areas experiences more damage when the flood gates caused over-flow to the interior areas.

Kaua‘i has few flood control structures. Those that exist are mostly levees built by the Corps of Engineers in Hanapēpē, Waimea and Kapa’a. Reservoirs are used for irriga on. These provide storage capacity, but do li le to protect against flooding downstream. There is s ll no Drainage Master Plan for the island.

Solid Waste The County provides direct service island-wide by collec ng solid waste and opera ng reuse and disposal facili es. This is administered by the Road Construc on and Maintenance Division of DPW.

Kekaha Landfill Phase II opened in 1993 a er Phase I reached capacity and closed. It handles 67,000 tons of solid waste. There are refuse transfer sta ons in Hanalei, Kapa’a, Līhu‘e, and Hanapēpē. There are six drop-off recycling centers and three green waste diversion sites, plus several Neighborhood recycling programs. Waste genera on was expected to grow 50% by 2020. Kekaha Phase II extended its lifespan by increasing to sixty feet and again in 2005 to 85 feet. A new landfill site needed to be located and developed. New transfer sta on was needed in Kapa’a.

The 1994 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (ISWMP) fulfills state requirements. Updates are required every five years. The focus is upon source reduc on and reuse through recycling, educa on and public informa on. There was an iden fied need for a proac ve process for si ng and designing sanitary landfills and facili es.

The ISWMP was updated in 2004 and its principle features are described below. It is the policy document for program, ac vi es and facili es for waste disposal. It is supported by complementary plans for a Central Compos ng Facility, Subside Recycling report, and the Kaua’i Resource Recovery Park Feasibility Study. The County is conduc ng site studies for the Resource Recovery Park. They have iden fied the Resource Recovery Park as cri cal to waste management strategies, a one-stop service center. This could be co-located with a new landfill.

Overall objec ves are to maximize recovery and minimize waste going into landfills. The current diversion rate is approximately 31%. County resolu on has a diversion goal of 70% by 2013. The County has a mul pronged approach:

• Recycling and waste disposal for residents (who represent 45% of waste genera on) • Non-residen al waste is handled using private contractors. • Kaua’i Resource Center and eight decentralized recycling bins are operated and maintained

by private contractors under contract to the County • Kekaha Municipal Solid Waste Landfill is operated by Waste Management, Inc. under

contract to the County • Curbside collec on to 31, 297 accounts. Waste from residents goes to the transfer sta ons

where it is compacted and then sent to the landfill. Collec on transi oned to automated in 2010.

The 2006 County Code defines standards and requirements for new development storm drainage infrastructure. Guidelines are to:

Protect and preserve exis ng natural channels Protect from flood hazards Remove water without causing harm to the environment, property, or persons Reduce Pollutants and sediments Maintain peak runoff rates and volume at no more than current rates Protect wetlands


JULY 2015 63

• Green waste at four transfer sta ons (in 2011, came to 18,740 tons) • Special wastes ( res and ba eries, asbestos, white goods, medical waste, cooking oils, dead

animals, construc on materials, in general these are collected and shipped to Oahu or the mainland for disposal.

• Hazardous waste (paints, solvents) annual collec on day done by contract • Electronics preference is manufacturer take back programs; but will collect.

A er two ver cal expansions, in 2010 Kaua’i Landfill constructed a lateral expansion (Cell #1). Cell 2 is in the permi ng process. The current peak waste is 75,000 tons of solid waste per year. Both lateral and ver cal expansion of the three cells is needed. Once capacity is reached, the landfill will start to be close and capped, es mated to be within 7-10 years. Consequently, the County is in site selec on and environmental review for a new Kaua’i Landfill and Resource Recovery Park, ideally in Lihue due to its central loca on. Site loca on has been challenging and the EA/EIS is underway. Currently, the highest ranked site is along Maalo Road. Alternate disposal technologies are being studied, including bio-refinery, landfill gas to energy, waste to energy, and waste to fuel.

As a ma er of policy, reduc on and re-use are encouraged in all aspects of local life. Home compos ng, re-use programs, educa on, recyclable bags and packaging are all employed. As of FY 2011, the Kaua’i Recyclable drop-in bin gathered 1.640 tons and the private collector an addi on 1,080 tons. Since 2005 the HI-5 bo ling redemp on centers have been in opera on, in FY 2011 they collected 2730 tons. Based on results of a 2011 pilot program, the County intends to move to island-wide recycling collec on once a Resource Recovery Facility is available.

The ISWMP uses higher popula on projec ons than the SMS projec ons for the 2035 General Plan. This should not create any problem. Waste genera on is fairly constant at 6.7 pounds per day per person. When applied to the 2035 de facto popula on this comes to 58,049 tons per year residents and an addi onal 131,953 tons for commercial, a 17% increase over 2020.

The R.M. Towill General Plan Update Kaua‘i Infrastructure Analysis (2015) recommends three policies and five implemen ng ac ons for the General Plan. These will all be considered.

10.2 ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES

There is ample data in the technical studies for the General Plan to work with for Solid Waste and for Wastewater, although the forecast years for both fall short of what is needed. Infrastructure has the full a en on of the administra on and Council which is helpful but also generates disagreements about philosophy and approach.

The data needed for Water is insufficient to do what is needed in the General Plan. Same for Drainage which has li le data to use for General Plan purposes.

Financing es mates for improvements is inconsistent and difficult to aggregate as a result. A methodology to help inform priori es in implemen ng ac ons needs to be devised. A separate technical paper was prepared by Group 70 Interna onal to iden fy exis ng sources of revenue for infrastructure and to explore the opportuni es for new sources to provide upgrades, new facili es, and improvements.


JULY 2015 64

Federal sources:

Coastal Zone Management Cer fied Local Government Discre onary grants USDA: Community Facili es Development Grant for rural communi es USDA Rural Development EPA Clean Water Revolving Fund (for sep c wastewater projects EPA Nonpoint source Sec on 319 US Economic Development Administra on

State sources: Grants

County sources: County General Funds and Bond Finance Real Property Tax User Fees Impact Fees

The County has retained EPS to assist in iden fying strategies to incen vize infill development. Rather than conver ng agricultural lands and open spaces to suburban housing developments, infill can address affordability issues and preserve the natural character of the island. Strategies include infrastructure financing programs, incen ve zoning, use of public proper es, and other methods. EPS will evaluate the “Return on Investment” for various ini a ves, and will provide a training session for County staff and officials regarding best prac ces and recommenda ons for applying those in Kaua’i’s unique circumstances.


For now, there are many ques ons about infrastructure that go beyond the ability of the GP to fill the gaps. SSFM will prepare for the County considera on a proposal for how to fill the most pressing gaps so as to provide the best informed policy debate and means for se ng priori es of scarce funding. The basic block for this will be to disaggregate it by Planning District and match it up with the demographic forecasts.

Disaggrega on by Planning District

How do the service areas line up with the district service boundaries? For water, Are rural areas to be served by wells only? For wastewater, Are sep c systems the only system to be expected in rural areas?

Deficiencies in the major systems. How this compares to forecasted growth by district.

Can the Facility Reserve Charge adequately support needs of the water system? Is it realis c to assume all developers can provide source, storage, and transmission of water, and if not, does this give unfair advantage to the large landowners?

What are the issues related to si ng a new landfill now that Kekaha II is at capacity?

In addi on, there is inconsistent informa on about the costs of various upgrades, replacements and new facili es among the four infrastructure areas. This will make it difficult to have a complete assessment of the cost of growth or adherence to environmental goals. A process for reconciling this will have to be developed.


JULY 2015 65

Policies

Define a process for se ng priori es in public infrastructure investments. Should there be growth alloca on policies according to how infrastructure can support it, or vice versa. Should infrastructure priori es be given if a project provides housing or jobs? Define the requirements for privately provided infrastructure. Do concurrency policies discourage infill? Do they unwi ngly incen vize greenfields over in-fill?

Funding for Infrastructure

The Infrastructure and Public Facili es Needs Assessment Report provides informa on per nent to an impact fee approach. But that does not cover all the needs, nor does it cover all users. Funding needs to be discussed in parallel with the above issues on disaggrega on, deficiencies, and policies.

10.4 RESOURCES

R.M. Towill. 2015. General Plan Update Kaua‘i Infrastructure AnalysisCounty of Kaua‘i Department of Water. March 2001. Water Plan 2020.

Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr. August 2012. Holo 2020: Growing Kaua‘i Responsibly. Presenta on at Waimea, Kalāheo, Līhu‘e and Kīlauea Neighborhood Centers.

Hawai’i Ins tute for Public Affairs. June 2014. Report on the State of Physical Infrastructure in Hawai’i Phase II: Final Report to the Economic Development Administra on, U.S. Department of Commerce.

Kaua‘i County Planning Department, Kaua‘i County CIP Manager. 2013. County of Kaua‘i Six-Year Capital Improvements Program FY 2014/15 – 2019/20 Final Report.

State of Hawai’i Department of Health, Office of Solid Waste Management. July 2000. Integrated Solid Waste Management.

State of Hawai’i, Department of Land and Natural Resources. Commission on Water Resource Management. February 1990. Kaua‘i Water Use and Development Plan.

State of Hawai’i, Office of Planning. 2010. Hawai’i Statewide Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS).

\\Sanfilehnl02\proj\2014\2014_042.000 COK Kaua‘i General Plan Update\H Reports\00 REFERENCES\Water\Water Use & Dev Plan Update AUG2014-FINAL.pdf


JULY 2015 66



JULY 2015 67

11.0 MULTIMODAL LAND TRANSPORTATION 11.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Kaua‘i is at a crossroads for its future transporta on. Traffic conges on is one of the community’s most frequently expressed concerns, and it impacts nearly everyone on the island. The County has undertaken planning efforts and iden fied projects to reduce the demand pressure on the island’s roadways, however, the reality is that the list of poten al projects far exceeds the poten al sources of funding. The island has had to make tough choices that some mes result in a scaling back of projects that support mul modal transporta on. These planning efforts and challenges are further elaborated upon in this sec on.

Building on the vision found in the 2000 GP and with the adop on of the Kaua‘i Mul modal Land Transporta on Plan (MLTP) in 2012, all land modes are in considera on – motor vehicle travel, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian. The mul modal plan reviews exis ng condi ons and trends and examines forecasts and future scenarios. It also discusses how land use relates to transporta on.

Quo ng from the 2000 General Plan, the concept even then was for:

“Mul Modal Op ons. Safe bicycle and pedestrian routes have been provided. State and county agencies have adopted ‘flexible highway design,’ in order to enhance scenic and historic quali es and to strike a balance flow of automobile traffic and safe facili es for buses, bicycles and pedestrians. Increased public parking and pedestrian friendly improvements to sidewalks and streets have been implemented in Līhu‘e and Kaua‘i’s other historic small towns.”

This simple but profound concept (having walkable and bike-able compact communi es; helping historic towns retain their small friendly character) remains valid and was incorporated into the work of both the Līhu‘e and South Kaua‘i Community Plans which were updated and adopted in 2015.

The MLTP has eight goals for 2020 and 2035, along with over forty objec ves. They address balance, flexibility, choice in the system along with good design, improvements to public health, less dependence on imported petroleum for fuel, and keeping the system in good repair. But the most ambi ous are embedded in the “preferred scenario assump ons”:

• Total island-wide VMT will remain at 2010 levels • Fatality rates from vehicle collision reduced by 10% by 2020 and 15% by 2035 • Increase physical ac vity levels by 14% by 2020 and 31% by 2035.

Preferred Scenario Mode Shares (from MLTP)

2010 2020 2030

Single occupant 54.4% 49.2% 39.4%

Mul ple occupant 38.7% 38.3% 37.9%

Transit 0.4% 1.3% 3.6%

Walk 4.5% 7.6% 11.5%

Bicycle 2.0% 3.6% 7.6%


JULY 2015 68

This translates to VMT at 771.5 thousand vehicle miles travelled through 2035, despite popula on increases. This is proposed to be accomplished through “mode shi ”, or shi ing some trips from single occupancy vehicle to transit, bicycle and pedestrian trips. Sta s cs for the last several years show that county-wide VMT increasing between 2011 and 2013, but then decreasing substan ally from 2013 to 2014. This trend is mirrored at the State level. Several factors that may contribute to con nued decrease or stabiliza on of VMT include several bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects in design and construc on, recent approval of the South Kaua‘i and Līhu‘e Community Plans, both of which encourage compact walkable neighborhoods). Nonetheless, it is clear that realizing the long-term goals of the plan will require significant infrastructure investment and changes to growth pa erns supported by land use policies.

The Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transporta on Plan for the District of Kaua‘i (LRTP) was completed by the State Department of Transporta on Highways Division in July 2014. The LRTP takes a different approach than the MLTP. Rather than considering mode shi , the plan assumes that current mode split will remain constant through 2035, so that VMT will grow propor onally with popula on. The results of this approach are numerous capacity projects to address exis ng and projected future conges on. One problem with this approach is that demand for addi onal lane miles far exceeds an cipated financial resources to pay for construc on and long-term maintenance of an expanded roadway system. Based on historical funding and projected cost es mates, the LRTP proposes $3.1 billion in projects but an cipates only $630 million in funding over the life of the plan. Given that the list of poten al transporta on projects far exceeds poten al funding, it is cri cal that Kaua‘i establish priori es and make smart transporta on investments. The LRTP makes it clear that while new roadway projects may be part of the future, it will not be feasible to build our way out of future growth and conges on. Based on similar findings and limited funding na onwide, it is both a na onal and state trend to shi the focus of transporta on projects to conges on reduc on and system preserva on instead of major capacity projects.

The MLTP is a policy-level document. While there are specific implementa on steps, it does not iden fy specific infrastructure projects. At this me, it is not known what specific set of investments would create what amount of mode shi over what period of me. The Transporta on Agency has been tasked with iden fying a program for advancing its opera ons in a logical and cost effec ve manner.

Kaua‘i adopted a Complete Streets ordinance in 2010. Since then, the first complete streets project was constructed on Hardy Street. It adds sidewalks, bike lanes, landscaping, and an urban roundabout in the heart of Līhu‘e. Addi onal complete streets projects and Safe Routes to School projects are advancing.

Kaua‘i Bus is operated by the County Transporta on Agency. It is funded in part by the Federal Transit Agency (for capital expenditures such as vehicles and maintenance facility), from $2.00 fares (14% fare box recovery), and from County subsidy (64% of total cost). There are eight fixed-route lines plus paratransit service. Mainline routes provide regional trips while shu les provide localized trips. In 2012, there were 2,500 daily riders (75,000 monthly). The fleet was 43 buses, all wheelchair accessible and with bicycle racks. The total budget in 2012 was $7.4 million.

Cost Es mates by Funding Program for Kaua‘iProjects (from LRTP)

System Preserva on $315 Million Safety $595 Million Capacity (non-constrained) $2.1 Billion Conges on $57 Million Other $10 Million TOTAL $3.1 Billion


JULY 2015 69

The county has been regularly installing passenger ameni es such as bus shelters at stops, adding wi-fi, transit tracker and informa on, increased frequencies and hours of service, park and ride lots and purchasing larger buses.

Separate from the Kaua‘i Bus, the Office of Economic Development ini ated a pilot North Shore shu le project connec ng from Princeville to Kē‘ē Beach, with the intent of reducing traffic and parking demand, especially in the vicinity of Hā‘ena State Park. The pilot began in 2014 and ended in 2015. While the pilot was focused on visitors, nearly half of the riders were local residents. The Po‘ipū Beach Resort Associa on also ini ated a pilot shu le in Po‘ipū, funded en rely by resort associa on members. Both pilots were ended due to a lack of long-term funding streams. The County has ini ated a study of north shore/south shore/east side shu le and transit services to determine a long-term, sustainable approach to expand transit service with local circulators. The traffic along the highway throughout Kapa‘a is one of the community’s biggest concerns. The 2000 GP included assump ons regarding the permanent relief route that are no longer valid. The Kapa‘a Transporta on Solu ons study is intended to provide relief to the traffic conges on. The sources of funding and opera ons system are not yet known.

11.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Set priori es. The County of Kaua‘i has a clearer focus than other municipali es for what it wants to accomplish, for example for bike facility projects and certain roadway improvements that support land use goals and smart growth principles such as complete streets. When discre onary Federal funds come available (such as Tiger Grants) or Federal funds released from other projects, then Kaua‘i can act quickly to put together their applica ons with suppor ng materials. The County is also well-posi oned to incorporate mul -modal facili es into tradi onal roadway resurfacing and reconstruc on projects funded with both County and Federal funds.

Transit studies in progress (The North Shore/South Shore Transit Feasibility Study and a Short-Range Transit Plan) provide ongoing analysis, review and poten al jus fica on for se ng priori es, and for preparing requisite transporta on and environmental impact documents that are part of project delivery. Both the Līhu‘e and South Kaua‘i Community Plans include lists of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements that meet the aims of each Planning District and support walkable towns and neighborhoods. These can be implemented individually or in groups.

New funding sources. The County has a window of opportunity to raise funds from the general excise tax for funding transporta on projects. This rela vely unrestricted source was made possible by the 2015 State Legislature when it extended the GET surtax for Honolulu’s rail system with a provision that re-opened the opportunity for other coun es to also use the GET surtax. The window is short, and must be enacted by ordinance before June 2016.

The LRTP also lists a dozen other new sources of revenue for the County (or State) to consider for transporta on projects. Any tax is a ba le, but if the County is to realize any of its ambi ous goals for mode shi , then it is likely that one or more must be seriously considered.

The 2014 (Dra ) Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study prepared as a technical study for the General Plan calculates daily trip genera on using ITS Land Use defini ons and trip factors. The bo om line conclusion from that study is that there will con nue to be increases in volumes with resul ng increases in conges on. The study suggests that impact fees could be collected for mul modal facili es as shown in the table on the next page.


JULY 2015 70

Project Total Es mated Construc on Cost

Impact Fee Eligible

Līhu‘e Civic Center Site Improvements*

$20,150,000 Yes

Lima Ola Workforce Housing Development – Offsite Infrastructure*

$3,766,000 Yes

Puhi Road Resurfacing $1,217,000 Maybe

Kawaihau Road Safety Improvements $5,000,000 Yes

Pu’u Road Safety Improvements $400,000 Maybe

Kanaele Road Repairs $2,500,000 Maybe

‘Ōpaeka‘a Bridge $6,000,000 Maybe

Pu‘u‘opae Bridge $5,000,000 Maybe

Hanapēpē Road Resurfacing* $2,500,000 Yes

Kōloa Guard Rails $1,070,000 Maybe

Kapahi Bridge $5,600,000 Maybe

Līhu‘e-Hanamā‘ulu Mauka Bypass Road

$40,000,000 Yes

‘Anini Bridge Replacement $1,500,000 Maybe

Northerly Leg Western Bypass Road $19,550,000 Yes

Bus Stop Improvements* $1,200,000 Yes

Pouli Road* $6,000,000 Yes

Kīlauea Town Bypass Road* $6,000,000 Yes

Total $131,953,000 $104,166,000**

Source: Kaua‘i County Six-Year Capital Improvements Program (CIP), FY 2013/14 – 2018/19 *The County indicated these projects are not yet in the CIP, but will be added in the future.

**Total does not include projects listed as “Maybe”

11.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED MULTIMODAL LAND TRANSPORTATION

Transporta on discussions in the 2000 GP were based on the high end projec ons; that is, they assumed a 74,300 resident popula on (by 2020) and a daily visitor census of 28,000. These numbers are not that far off from the numbers now being projected for 2035 in the GP update underway. Thus, whether one is speaking of vehicle trips or person trips, the demand is in a range of about 10-15% of what it was fi een years ago. What has changed is how one considers those trips. In par cular, what is needed for longer trips to be taken in buses, and for shorter trips to be taken on foot or by bicycle.

Highways and Roads, Bus Transit, and Bikeways were handled under “Building Public Facili es and Services.” There was no discussion of the Walk Mode. This, in itself is a significant change to current


JULY 2015 71

thinking which focuses on compact, walkable communi es and a conscious shi in mode to non-vehicular alterna ves.

Highways were described as two-lane roads connec ng major developed areas. Kaumuali’i Highway (Route 50) runs south and west, while Kūhiō Highway runs north to east; Līhu‘e is the hub where these connect. Kūhiō, Kaumuali’i, and Kapule Highways (built as a Līhu‘e Bypass) were congested especially at peak mes, and the State Department of Transporta on was trending towards 4 lane divided highways or three lane sec ons. A temporary bypass mauka of Kūhiō Highway was built in 1995 using private cane haul roads.

Road condi ons were described as level D, E, or F for average daily traffic. Poor condi ons in Kapa’a Town and in parts of Līhu‘e were noted. Calls for curing deficiencies included widening Kaumuali’i from Līhu‘e to Maluhia and a permanent Kapa’a Bypass. The twenty year list of capacity improvements exceeded $300 Million.

Bus transit at the me included six routes (there are now eight) and a paratransit system from Hanalei to Kekaha. This involved 30 buses (versus current 43) averaging 18,120 riders per month (there has been a four-fold increase). The transit policy was to increase ridership and expand service subject to the availability of funds (emphasis added).

The Bike sec on describes having 3.8 miles consis ng of bikeways along Kapule Highway in Līhu‘e and a bike path along the coast fron ng Kapa’a Beach Park. The State Bike Plan (1994) proposed another 173 miles of bikeways island-wide, about two-thirds to be completed by the State and the balance by the County. Total costs were projected at $40 million. The bicycle policy was to support development of a bikeway system to provide an alterna ve means of transporta on, recrea on, and visitor ac vi es. A check of the current system shows li le has changed (unfortunately).

11.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROECESS

Work on transporta on to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Update current use data on bicycles and vehicles. 2) Incorporate the policies from the MLTP into the appropriate sec on(s) of the updated General

Plan. 3) Incorporate data from studies currently in progress that calculate the amount of tax that would

be derived from a GET surcharge and provide policy guidance for types of projects to receive priority for this new source of revenue for transporta on.

4) Review tracking results for the goals of the MLTP. Iden fy and add discussions for what would it take to achieve them. Determine how these goals support (or not) other goals in the General Plan. For example, how do the walk and bicycle goals fit with the land use and compact community goals; and also, how do mobility goals fit with tourism goals.

5) Meet with the Kaua‘i Transporta on Agency to determine what was completed from the immediate (1-3 years) implementa on phase of the MLTP as well as the likelihood for those in the mid-Range (through 2020), or any re-direc on iden fied.

6) Update the latest measures for VMT and mode share. Engage Jim Charlier, transporta on subconsultant and author of the MLTP, in a discussion on recommenda ons for how to handle policy coordina on and elimina ng discrepancies in the General Plan transporta on policies.

7) Review the Land Use Program recommenda ons in the MLTP to iden fy how the General Plan policies can support and complement them and therefore help to guide future Community Plans, including transporta on components that should be included in future Community Plans.


JULY 2015 72

8) Iden fy future plans/studies that should be completed, such as an islandwide bicycle/pedestrian plan.

9) With limited funding for transporta on projects, iden fy the need to establish transporta on priori es based on goals.

11.5 RESOURCES

County of Kauaʻi. September 2012. Kaua‘i Mul modal Land Transporta on Plan.

Get Fit Kaua‘i Built Environment Task Force and County of Kaua‘i. 2014. Complete Streets Indicators.

Smart Growth America, Na onal Complete Streets Coali on. February 2015. The Best Complete Streets Policies of 2014.

State of Hawai’i Department of Transporta on. 2003. Bike Plan Hawai’i.

State of Hawai’i Department of Transporta on Harbors Division. September 2001. Kaua‘i Commercial Harbors 2025 Master Plan.

State of Hawai’i Department of Transporta on Highways Division. May 2013. Statewide Pedestrian Master Plan.

County of Kaua‘i. 2015. Līhuʻe Community Plan.

Group 70 Interna onal. 2014. (Dra ) Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study


JULY 2015 73

12.0 ENERGY 12.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

In 2013, Kaua‘i’s residents and businesses spent $92 million on imported oil, accoun ng for 85% of Kaua‘i’s electricity use. The high cost of energy nega vely impacts average household budgets, and contributes to the high cost of living on Kaua‘i. Use of imported fossil fuels for energy results in an ou low of money from the local economy. Furthermore, the burning of fossil fuels degrades air quality and contributes to environmental and social problems on a global scale.

The majority of Kaua‘i’s electricity is generated at the diesel-fired power plant located at Port Allen. As reported in 2013, 15% of Kaua‘i’s electricity comes from renewable resources (primarily hydropower and solar resources). Renewables con nue to demonstrate increasingly be er financial and environmental returns, and their use is growing rapidly.

Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve Board of Directors adopted an ambi ous goal to use renewable resources to generate at least 50% of Kaua‘i’s energy by 2023. This goal exceeds the requirements established by Act 234, the 2007 law establishing the framework to reduce greenhouse gas emissions emi ed in 2020 to the 1990 emission level. It also surpasses the requirements set by Act 73 in 2010, the Hawai’i Clean Energy Ini a ve, which calls for 70% clean energy by 2030, with 40% of that amount coming from renewable sources and the remaining 30 percent from energy efficiency improvements. KIUC is making rapid progress toward its goal, with renewables accoun ng for 15% of sales today, up from 5% in 2008. By 2015, renewable genera on is projected to be at 42%, with a mix that includes solar, biomass and hydropower (KIUC 2013-2015 Strategic Plan).

Kauaʻi has several projects that have been iden fied as “Hawaii’s Clean Energy Leaders” by the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism’s State Energy Office (last updated in 2012). These projects include:

• Green Energy Agricultural Biomass-to-Energy Facility / Green Energy Team, LLC (Biomass) Locally grown eucalyptus, albizia, and other agricultural waste will be used as biomass fuel to generate enough renewable electricity to power 8,500 Kaua‘i households. 6.7 MW

• Port Allen Solar Facility / A&B, McBryde, KIUC (Photovoltaic) This PV array is built on 20 acres of industrial land adjacent to KIUC’s Port Allen Sta on Power Plant. The facility is integrated into a planned ba ery storage system installed by KIUC. Partners include Hoku Solar and Helix Electric. 6 MW

• Po’ipū Solar / AES, KIUC, Knudsen Trust (Photovoltaic) This PV array to be built on Knudsen Trust Land will power 800 homes on Kaua‘i. The facility will be connected to a ba ery storage system at the point of interconnec on to the KIUC grid. 3 MW

• Anahola Solar / Homestead Community Development Corpora on, REC Solar, KIUC (Photovoltaic) Developed by REC Solar, the project was undertaken by the Homestead


JULY 2015 74

Community Development Corpora on in partnership with KIUC on 53 acres of land owned by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. 12 MW

• Kālepa Water Project / KIUC (Hydroelectric) A dual purpose irriga on and hydroelectric project with a capacity of 4.0 MW and an es mated annual produc on of 15.2 GWh. The proposed project would u lize water from the exis ng Wailuā Reservoir and the South Fork Wailuā River. 4 MW

• Puu Opae Water Project / KIUC (Hydroelectric) A dual purpose irriga on and hydroelectric project with a capacity of 8.3 MW and an es mated annual produc on of 40 GWh. The proposed project would u lize water from the exis ng Kokee Ditch Irriga on System, provide irriga on water for DHHL lands and ADC lands, and integrate with exis ng irriga on users. 8.3 MW

• Hanalei River Hydroelectric Project / KIUC (Hydroelectric) A small run-of-river hydroelectric project with a capacity of 3.0 MW and an es mated annual produc on of 14.5 GWh. The proposed project would involve diver ng water from the Hanalei River to a new powerhouse located about 3.5 miles upstream of the Hanalei Bridge. 3 MW

• Puu Lua Hydropower Project /Pacific Light & Power, Konohiki Hydro Power (Hydroelectric) The Kokee Ditch will serve as the source for a modern, efficient pressurized irriga on system that will service over 6,000 acres of agricultural lands. Power generated at the Upper and Lower Puu Lua hydro plants will be sold to the Kekaha Agricultural Associa on and its members, with excess made available to the island of Kaua‘i. 5.3 MW

• Kekaha Menehune Water Project /KIUC (Hydroelectric) A dual purpose irriga on and hydroelectric project with a capacity of 1.5 MW and an es mated annual produc on of 6.5 GWh. The proposed project would u lize water from the exis ng Kekaha Ditch Irriga on System for genera on and to provide water and repairs for the Menehune Ditch. 1.5 MW

• Anahola Water Project / KIUC (Hydroelectric) A dual purpose irriga on and hydro project with a capacity of 300 kWh and an es mated annual produc on of 1.25 GWh. The proposed project would u lize the exis ng Upper Anahola Diversion and a rehabilitated reservoir, and provide irriga on water for DHHL lands in Anahola. 300 kW

• Olokele River Hydroelectric Project /Gay & Robinson, KIUC (Hydroelectric) The proposed Olokele River Hydropower Project will have a 6 MW capacity. 6 MW

Energy use and supply are linked to strategies and policies for land uses, development, building sizes, architectural design, transporta on planning, environmental protec on, air quality and economic development. Land use and permi ng implica ons for par cular renewables are as follows:

• Solar-electric: Building code regula ons govern the loca on of panels on buildings and on the ground; ability to connect into the electrical grid and compensa on for electricity generated. Smart grid technologies, including new meters that can be read and adjusted remotely, help KIUC manage and monitor its grid more efficiently. The intelligent grid and improved connec ons between energy generators and users.

• Wind: Land use codes govern the installa on of wind turbines. While wind resources are plen ful and wind developers have explored opportuni es on the island, their development is limited due to the risk of impacts to endangered and threatened species. The risk of viola ons under the Endangered Species Act have outweighed wind energy’s poten al returns on Kaua‘i. Kaua‘i has a high number of protected seabirds that are sensi ve to lights and collisions with above ground structures. There has also been community opposi on to noise and visual impacts associated with wind. Consequently, KIUC’s and the Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan’s stated posi on is that wind energy is not viable for Kaua‘i at this me.


JULY 2015 75

• Hydropower: On the west side are the two projects that are most viable for future KIUC hydro development. Both are on state land, with one using water from the Kōke’e Ditch and Puʻu Opae Reservoir, and the second using water from the Kekaha Ditch. A 4-megawa project on the Wailuā River is also feasible technically and financially. While hydro energy is capital intensive, it is the lowest cost of power – 25 percent cheaper than solar/PV and about 30 percent cheaper all in than the cost of fossil fuel genera on. Hydro energy requires Federal approvals to minimize and mi gate poten al aesthe c impacts, cultural impacts and interests pertaining to maintaining waterways for agricultural, fishing, hun ng, recrea onal, and tourism purposes.

• Pumped storage: Pumped storage is essen ally a huge ba ery that stores water instead of electrons. It can use solar power to inexpensively pump water uphill to a storage pond during the day, then reuse the same water at night to turn a turbine and create electricity. KIUC is in discussions with the state Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), the state Agribusiness Development Corpora on (ADC) and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, which manage the two areas under considera on for pumped storage projects on the west side.

• Ocean energy: Ocean energy projects would be ini ated by the State, and would require NEPA and SMA permits, at minimum.

• Biomass: Plants require sufficient quan es of land which are zoned or used for agricultural purposes and have water. The biomass-to-energy facility near Kōloa is fueled by biomass from several sources, including short-rota on trees grown on about 2,000 acres and cleared invasive tree species.

• Landfill Biogas: The County has allocated funds in its FY 2016 budget for construc on of a biogas collec on system at the Kekaha Landfill. Assuming the captured methane meets quality and quan ty benchmarks, the next phase will be to construct a system to refine the methane into Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) that can be used to power Kaua‘i County’s public bus fleet. Previously completed studies have indicated that selling the gas to the Pacific Missile Range Facility for cogenera on could be economically viable for both the County and the Navy. Another possibility is power genera on from the methane and selling the power to KIUC.

As Kaua‘i’s popula on expands to 82,000 people by 2035, so will its energy needs and the infrastructure to meet those needs. According to the Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan, KIUC is projec ng a 2.3% annual increase in energy requirements, rising from 515 GWh of genera on in 2009 to 789 GWh in 2028. These increases respond to projected increased demand. They also take into account technological and efficiency advantages gained from installing new equipment and systems.

The Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan recognizes the need to develop energy infrastructure while protec ng natural scenery, wildlife, and habitats of endangered species. There is a need to in turn balance these divergent needs with fiscal constraints. The KESP recommended a 2% tax levy on gasoline and diesel from imported oil to build the proposed “Alterna ve Ground Transporta on Modes & Fuels Fund”. The KESP suggested that such a levy could fund:

• An improved public bus system. • Incen ves for efficient Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) that could cost Kaua`i ci zens 40% less

to operate than conven onal internal combus on vehicles. • A rental vehicle program for the visitor industry which would take rented vehicles off the road

while improving the Aloha Spirit shared with visitors. • Inexpensive conversion kits that would turn conven onal gasoline engines into Flex Fuel

engines capable of using either gasoline or ethanol to support local ethanol produc on. • Purchase of vegetable oil presses that would allow local small farmers to produce Straight

Vegetable Oil (SVO) for off-road vehicles, and poten ally public buses.


JULY 2015 76

• Incen ves for efficient Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs), residen al chargers, and KIUC Smart Grid enhancements to enable night- me charging of the vehicles with a 220-Volt charger at people’s homes.

• A 5% fee for the administra on of the “Alterna ve Ground Transporta on Modes & Fuels Fund”, community outreach and educa on ac vi es.

Technology advancements have been lowering the cost of renewables and increasing their viability. Individual households and businesses can now afford and u lize certain systems that were previously out of reach, such as photovoltaics. Larger energy producers and distributers are already adap ng their business models to accommodate changes. Changes to land uses and zoning can reduce energy consump on. The 2010 KESP suggested reducing the miles traveled between work and home with smart growth policies. A survey conducted for the 2010 KESP reveals that 76.5% of people surveyed support “smart growth or sustainable communi es policies” as a means toward reducing energy consump on.

The Hawai’i Clean Energy Ini a ve 2011 Roadmap, led by the State Energy Office and U.S. Department of Energy (with input from Coun es, u li es, and private sector stakeholders), calls for Kaua‘i to:

• Introduce mul ple biomass facili es for electricity and biofuels produc on; • Develop 15 MW of new hydroelectric genera on; • Develop a 10 to 15 MW solar thermal facility; • Generate 1.5-3 MW from the Kaua‘i County landfill gas system; and, generate approximately 350

KW of solar power. The Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve reported that in 2013 renewable energy projects combined generated a total of 13.3 MW.

Households and businesses have a role by conserving energy.

To summarize, the major issues in Energy include:

• Kauaʻi remains overly dependent on fossil fuels that are expensive and pollute the environment.

• Viable renewable energy is available in many forms, and there are plans and targets in place to support its expansion. Con nued investment in a diverse renewable energy por olio and energy efficiency measures will be necessary to switch over from fossil fuels.

• The need for expanded energy infrastructure will need to be balanced with protec ng natural scenery, wildlife, and habitats of endangered species, as well as fiscal constraints.

• Diverse, integrated alternate solu ons are preferable to single purpose projects or ac vi es.

12.2 OPPORTUNITIES

The Energy Plan Advisory Commi ee, or EPAC, is a group of government and community members convened by the County Office of Economic Development who have guided the development of the 2010-2030 Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan (KESP). The EPAC consists of par cipants from Kaua‘i County, Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve, representa ves of several community organiza ons as well as individual community members. The purpose of the KESP is to ensure maximum energy efficiency and conserva on

The isola on of Kauaʻi and its dependence on imported oil was never more apparent as the global economic recession took hold in late 2007. This dependence exposed Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve and its members to a record surge in the price of oil at the same

me the economic free-fall ba ered the budgets of island businesses and families. (Source: Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve. 2013-2015 Strategic Plan.)


JULY 2015 77

while facilita ng Kaua‘i’s produc on and use of local, sustainable energy resources in place of imported oil by the year 2030. The document includes specific goals, ac ons and melines for implementa on.

The focus of County energy policy moving forward would be to encourage and support projects that offer integrated solu ons and ancillary benefits. The KIUC west side water projects exemplify an integrated project development approach that both returns water the natural environment and generates water for energy and agriculture produc on. KIUC is in a posi on to add value to the exis ng water system by integra ng a pumped storage hydro project. This project could help provide revenues needed to more efficiently manage water resources; and manage compe ng needs by elimina ng waste. At the same

me, the project would provide major benefits to all Island residents in the form of more affordable clean energy.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Clean Energy Transforma on include:

The Energy Plan Advisory Commi ee in collabora on with KIUC has set ambi ous goals and is making headway toward achieving these goals.

12.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED ENERGY

• The Energy sec on of the GP will require significant upda ng from what it was in the 2000 GP. KIUC and the State Energy Office have readily available data that will allow the GP to be updated.

• The 2000 GP primarily documented the status of Kaua‘i’s electrical system and the degree to which the system sa sfies the Planning Districts. The 2000 GP recognized that renewables and a new “Service Center” could decentralize the exis ng system. The 2000 GP text did not discuss the variety of renewable energy sources or how wind, solar, ocean, hydro, etc. might be used to supplement or replace fossil fuels.

• The 2000 GP recommended that the County work with the electric power public u lity companies to (a) site and design power genera on plants and transmission facili es to blend with the natural landscape and to avoid impacts to important historic sites and viewplanes. Solu ons, include construc ng underground facili es when economically feasible, and (b) develop a proac ve process for si ng and designing power genera on plants and transmission lines that incorporates early and detailed consulta on and nego a on among the u lity, the County government, community stakeholders, and the general public.

• Policies are recommended to promote renewable energies, but targets for energy produc on are not specified.

12.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROECESS

Work on energy to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Update the Energy sec on of the General Plan to reflect current energy alterna ves (renewables) and advanced technologies (power grid).

2) The GP planning process can support KIUC’s energy goals by examining land use policies and their impacts on energy produc on.

3) The GP planning process could consider policies to encourage and support renewable energy projects that add value to other ac vi es and are compa ble with or beneficial to underlying land uses.

4) Confirm that KIUC projec ons reflect popula on projec ons within the Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts Technical Report.

5) Confirm that KIUC projec ons support land use, infrastructure and economic development policies in the updated GP.


JULY 2015 78

6) Energy policy will be reviewed by the CAC and presented at the next round of Community Mee ngs.

12.5 RESOURCES

Energy Plan Advisory Commi ee. February 2013. Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan EPAC Recommenda ons 2012.

Hawai’i Clean Energy Ini a ve. 2011. HCEI Road Map 2011 Edi on.

Hawai’i Natural Energy Ins tute. January 2014. Characterizing Commercial Sites Selected for Energy Efficiency Monitoring.

Kaua‘i Island U lity Coopera ve. 2013. 2013-2015 Strategic Plan.

Na onal Renewable Energy Laboratory. March 2012. Hawai’i Clean Energy Ini a ve Scenario Analysis: Quan ta ve Es mates Used to Facilitate Working Group Discussions (2008-2010).

Sentech Hawai’i, LLC. April 2010. The Kaua‘i Energy Sustainability Plan Final Report.

State of Hawai‘i, Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, Hawaii State Energy Office. 2012. Renewable Energy Projects in Hawaii – October 2012 h p://energy.hawaii.gov/renewable-energy-projects-in-hawaii


JULY 2015 79

13.0 COMMUNITY HEALTH 14.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

A coali on of health care providers and related agencies was formed in 2013 under the auspices of the Kaua‘i Community Health Improvement Ini a ve (CHII). The CHII built on the work of Get Fit Kaua‘i, a local organiza on whose mission is to improve the quality of life of the residents and visitors of Kaua`i County by working to promote opportuni es for physical ac vity and access to healthy foods. The CHII expands the concept of health. Tradi onally, “health” has been perceived as going to the doctor and reducing or curing disease. But in the context of the CHII and the GP, the rela onships of the built environment, including affordable housing, walkable communi es, ac ve transporta on choices, and access to healthy foods, all contribute to both community and individual health. This much broader concept of “health” can be incorporated into the GP.

The CHII partners include the Wilcox Memorial Hospital; Kaua‘i District Health Office, County of Kaua‘i; Department of Educa on – Kaua‘i Complex; University of Hawaii – Kaua‘i Community College; and, the Governor’s Office (Kaua‘i). They, in turn, reached out to stakeholders and formed a Leadership and Oversight Commi ee represen ng 30 different state and local organiza ons from the public, private and non-profit sectors. While the bonds between many of these organiza ons already existed, the planning process nurtured rela onships. The CHII’s priority issues are listed in the text box below.

An individual’s health is inherently ed to the health of the community in which he or she lives. According to the World Health Organiza on, a healthy city is one that is con nually crea ng and improving those physical and social environments and expanding those community resources which enable people to mutually support each other in performing all the func ons of life and developing to their maximum poten al. (Source: Community Health Improvement Ini a ve.)


JULY 2015 80

The CHII conducted a Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) for the County in 2014. This Assessment evaluated health outcomes (mortality and morbidity), and the physical environment, social and economic factors, clinical care, and behaviors that impact health outcomes.

The “community building” process proposed by the CHII parallels the efforts of the GP planning process. The five priority themes of the CHNA -Health and Wellness, Medical Care, Educa on and Lifelong

Learning, Housing, and Community Design and Planning - can be supported with GP implemen ng ac ons. The CHIP included 2-5 year strategies to achieve the vision, including recommenda ons for policies, systems and environment. Five working groups were created to address Built Environment, Housing, Educa on and Lifelong Learning, Medical Care, and Health and Wellness.

The table below illustrates health outcomes, the indicators used for each and whether Kaua‘i residents are doing be er or worse than the statewide average, 2020 Hawai’i Physical Ac vity and Nutri on Plan, or na on. Other indicators are used to evaluate physical environment, social and economic factors, clinical care, and behaviors. A related issue is health equity, or ensuring that all people have access to the resources and infrastructure to support a healthy lifestyle. As recommended by the 2013 CHNA, equity of opportunity can be measured by “comprehensive non-discriminant policies, progressive tax structure, dispari es in educa on, assistance in naviga ng through the healthcare system.”

Health Outcomes (Mortality)

Kaua‘i CountyBetter (B) or

Worse (W) than the State or HP

2020

Kaua‘i County Better (B) or Worse (W)

than the Nation

Premature Death W BCancer Mortality** B BHeart Disease Mortality** B BStroke Mortality** W WSuicide Rate** W WInfant Mortality** B B

Kaua‘i’s Community Health Improvement Ini a ve Priority Issues:

Health and Wellness (Upstream preven on): Easy, convenient access to affordable healthy food for busy families (concern about unhealthy fast food). Screening, early detec on and management for breast cancer, cervical cancer, diabetes, cholesterol, hypertension, colorectal cancer, HIV, etc.

Medical Care: Available, accessible, affordable and integrated mental healthcare/substance abuse/developmentally disabled services and facili es. Available, accessible, affordable and integrated medical care – first to last breath.

Educa on and Lifelong Learning: Health educa on for keiki, kupuna, ohana, and school/work/church sites (health literacy and workplace wellness).

Housing: Transi onal/homeless/affordable housing/senior housing.

Community Design and Planning: Walkable, bikeable, and safe communi es to encourage and promote physical ac vi es and social connec vity.


JULY 2015 81

Kaua‘i’s popula on is con nuing to grow older, the median age is shi ing upward, and life expectancy is increasing. While these trends point to improved health and longevity, Kaua‘i’s built environment will need to be modified to serve an older popula on. Such an environment is o en called “age-friendly”, meaning that it can accommodate the abili es of the very young, very old, and everyone in between.

The prevalence of chronic disease, like diabetes, is increasing, even though many chronic diseases can be prevented or controlled through lifestyle changes. The CHNA reports that Kauaʻi County’s residents have be er access to recrea on and fitness facili es and healthy foods than others in the State. However, 46% of restaurants on Kaua‘i are fast food restaurants, and the establishment rate of fast food restaurants on Kaua‘i (107.32 establishments per 100,000) people is much higher than that of the na on as a whole (69.26 establishments per 100,000 people).

The GP planning process, to date, has revealed resident dissa sfac on with a lack of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Speeding vehicles makes people feel unsafe. Poor intersec on design, an incomplete network of sidewalks, crosswalks, bicycle facili es, and other important features are lacking from the public realm. The CHNA suggests that busy lifestyles and/or a lack of health educa on nega vely impact families in Kaua‘i. Tobacco use is s ll allowed in many venues. Not all residents par cipate in vaccina on and cancer screening, and many people with chronic diseases are not managing them well. The lack of affordable housing creates stress for families that, in turn, affects health. Prevalence of teen pregnancy, STDs, suicide, domes c violence, bullying, and injuries is too high. To summarize, the major issues in Community Health include:

• Individual and community health are mutually dependent and require planning that accounts for improving health and wellness, medical care, educa on and lifelong learning, housing, and community design and planning in order to succeed.

• The popula on is living longer and requires an age-friendly, safe physical environment. • Community design and infrastructure should support healthy living.

Health Outcomes (Morbidity)Poor General Health

W Comparable (Not statistically

significant) Poor Physical Health Days*Poor Mental Health Days* W WLow Birth Weight B BBreast Cancer Incidence B BCervical Cancer Incidence** W WColon and Rectum Cancer Incidence W WDiabetes Prevalence B BHeart Disease Prevalence W BHIV Prevalence W BPoor Dental Health B BPopulation with Any Disability W W

Source: Kaua‘i’s Community Health Needs Assessment (2013) * Not a CHNA.ORG dashboard comparison ** Compared to HP 2020 Target, not the State


JULY 2015 82

13.2 OPPORTUNITIES

There are good founda ons for improving the health of Kaua‘i’s residents. Get Fit Kaua‘i’s Built Environment Task Force has become a policy leader in community health issues. The Task Force “recognizes that Kaua'i’s land use system should support ac ve, healthy lifestyles through human-scaled, rather than automobile-centered, development.” The task force is helping the County make the necessary changes to its planning system in order to support healthy community design. Milestones include the Kaua’i County Complete Streets Indicators Report and updates, Rice Street Week and work on planning for healthy communi es. Complete streets projects in mixed-use, vibrant town centers can sa sfy many recommenda ons offered by the CHII.

Other State and County health policies include:

• A New Day in Hawai‘i (State) • Hawai‘i Healthcare Ini a ve (State) • DOH Strategic Plan: Healthy People, Healthy Community, Healthy Islands (State) • Holo Holo 2020 (County)

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Community Health include:

• U lizing the Community Health Improvement Ini a ve’s work products to: o Provide a framework for public health as a component of the General Plan. o Iden fy land use and planning issues that affect health o Provide baseline data and measurable indicators o Provide health-related goals, policies and strategies that can be considered in the

General Plan • Harnessing the energy and exper se of the CHII’s working groups for future ini a ves and to

implement the recommenda ons of the GP. • Compact, walkable communi es whose built environment and mix of uses support healthy

lifestyles and enhance social interac on. • Complete streets and mul modal transporta on op ons can contribute to healthier

communi es. “Ac ve transporta on” is a means of ge ng around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling. Ac ve transporta on becomes easier and safer when streets are designed to accommodate pedestrians and people on bicycles.

• A dedicated coali on of volunteers and industry leaders commi ed to improving public health.

13.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED PUBLIC HEALTH

• The 2000 GP did not include a chapter on Community Health, and so this will be a new chapter. The CHII and CHNA have data and policy recommenda ons that can be used to dra this new chapter.

• The current, broader defini on of community health speaks to the environment in which people live, making linkages between health housing, transporta on, and other elements of the built environment. The 2000 GP did not acknowledge these links.


JULY 2015 83


Work on Community Health to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) The 2014 Kaua‘i Community Health Improvement Plan and the Built Environment Task Force Evalua on of Public Health Policies in the General Plan 2000 present goals and recommenda ons that can be used to support public health policy adjustments in the General Plan. The connec ons between community health and other policy areas, including alterna ve transporta on modes, recrea onal facili es, housing, public services, and characteris cs of the built environment, can be emphasized in the GP planning process.

2) In order to sustain and improve community health, programs and policies can be assessed from an equity perspec ve.

3) The indicators used in the CHNA to assess community health can be considered as indicators to assess progress in implemen ng the GP.

4) Public Health policy will be reviewed by the CAC and may be presented at future Community Mee ngs.

13.5 RESOURCES

County of Kaua‘i. June 2014. Kaua‘i Community Health Improvement Plan.

County of Kauaʻi. July 2013. Kaua‘i’s Community Health Needs Assessment

County of Kauaʻi Built Environment Task Force. February 2015. Evalua on of Public Health Policies in the General Plan 2000.

Hawai’i State Department of Health. Hawai’i Physical Ac vity and Nutri on Plan 2013-2020.

Jeanne Anthony. January 8, 2015. Crea ng Livable Communi es for all Ages.

Ricklin, A., et al. 2012. Healthy Planning: An Evalua on of Comprehensive and Sustainability Plans Addressing Public Health. Chicago: American Planning Associa on. Kaua‘i Planning and Ac on Alliance.

Kaua'i Planning and Ac on Alliance. 2014. Measuring What Ma ers for Kaua‘i: Community Indicators Report 2014.


JULY 2015 84



JULY 2015 85

14.0 CULTURAL AND HERITAGE RESOURCES 14.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Kaua‘i has thousands of archaeological sites and hundreds of historic buildings. Of these, approximately 60 historic buildings and complexes and 30 archaeological sites are listed on the Na onal Register of Historic Places, the Hawai‘i Register of Historic Places, or both. There are also lis ngs for historic objects and historic structures, such as the Hanalei Pier. Na ve Hawaiian coastal burials, ar facts, and structures are par cularly vulnerable to inunda on and erosion.

The Hawaiian and Pacific Island cultures, however, are not simply of interest for historic purposes. These cultures, and those brought more recently by newcomers to Kaua‘i, are alive and contribu ng to the shared values and aloha spirit that unites the Island.

The physical environment is closely linked to Kaua‘i’s cultural and heritage resources. There is great concern that development and the adverse impacts of sea-level rise will reduce access to tradi onal food sources and subsistence fishing. These ac vi es, and others, help people sustain connec ons with a defined place and keep unique customs and prac ces alive.

Reten on of Kaua‘i’s one lane bridges, especially on the North shore, helps preserve the character of the community. Similar bridges exist in Kōloa, Kekaha, and Waimea Districts. From me to me decisions balancing preserva on and economic revitaliza on need to be made. It is cri cal that community desires drive such decisions.

To summarize, the major issues in Cultural and Heritage Resources include:

• Kaua‘i’s cultural and heritage resources contribute to maintaining a sense of place and belonging and provide a basis for properly caring for the land.

• Historic buildings and infrastructure may be more expensive to keep in good condi on, but some are worth the investment.

• Heritage Resource maps have not been consistently or regularly updated.

Kahua O Kāneiolouma (pictured above) is a cultural site containing the remnants of an ancient Hawaiian village at Po‘ipū. The 13-acre complex is under the jurisdic on of the County of Kauaʻi and contains numerous habita on, cul va on, spor ng or assembly, and religious structures da ng to at least the mid-1400’s.

The complex is largely intact but in need of rehabilita on. Under a Stewardship Agreement signed in August 2010, the County of Kauaʻi granted formal custodianship of the Kāneiolouma complex to Hui Mālama O Kāneiolouma. The rehabilita on project was also included in Mayor Bernard P. Carvalho’s Holo Holo 2020 plan.

Following an outline developed by Na ve Hawaiian archaeological expert Henry E.P. Kekahuna, the Master Plan addresses a seven year horizon, with work in four overlapping phases. Work began in 2012.


JULY 2015 86

• Important decisions need to be made as aging infrastructure reaches its life cycle age. These decisions must balance community character and wishes.

14.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Registra on, or designa on, on the State and Na onal Registers of Historic Places may protect historic sites from demoli on or inappropriate renova on; registered sites may also be eligible for restora on grants, tax incen ves or assistance that leads to their upkeep.

Kaua‘i’s Historic Preserva on Review Commission is a valuable organiza on of local experts. Given addi onal resources, this Commission can probably assist with promo ng awareness of exis ng resources and implemen ng programs to expand and maintain Kaua‘i’s inventory of cultural and heritage resources.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Cultural and Heritage Resources include:

• Addi onal sites may be eligible for historic designa on; lis ng them can prevent their demoli on or inappropriate renova on.

• Mapped resources can be further protected with the County’s Open District, or acquired with Public Access funds.

• The preserva on of the Kaneiolouma site can serve as a model for County resource protec on efforts.

14.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED CULTURAL AND HERITAGE RESOURCES

• The 2000 GP contains an extensive sec on tled “Caring for Land, Water and Culture”. Several sub-sec ons, including “Overview”, “Historic and Archeological Resources”, and Na ve Hawaiian Rights” remain largely current and relevant today.

• The 2000 GP recommended providing a buffer area and pedestrian access for historic/archaeological sites, to incen vize rehabilita on of historic structures, and to establish an "historic district" overlay with design guidelines where needed. This task has not yet been ini ated.

• To further protect historic proper es, the 2000 GP recommended studying the market, costs, sources of funding, and opera onal feasibility of crea ng an island wide low-cost rehabilita on loan program for historic structures. This task has not yet been ini ated.

• The GP recommended that the State Historic Preserva on Division (SHPD) prepare "Archaeological Resource Poten al Maps" for Kaua‘i, with assistance and input from the Kaua‘i Historic Preserva on Review Commission, the Planning Department, and the Kaua‘i Burials Council. However, SHPD did not concur, and it has not yet been ini ated.

• The Heritage Resource Maps need upda ng; not all of the data is not readily available.


Work on cultural and heritage resources to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) The 2000 GP called for the development of maps that iden fied the poten al loca ons of archeological resources as a means of genera ng greater awareness of cultural resources and the need for their protec on. This was not done.

2) The last local inventory of resources was conducted in 1990 (County of Kaua‘i Historic Resources Inventory and Management Plan). This type of inventory can help determine what resources need maintenance or protec on. However, upda ng this inventory is not within the scope of the GP Update.


JULY 2015 87

3) The County’s efforts to support the preserva on/restora on of Kaneiolouma is a model for the preserva on of other important cultural sites. The effort can be documented for inclusion in the GP during the mee ngs with agencies.

4) Heritage resources were mapped, as part of the South Kauaʻi Community Plan. This can be repeated for the other Community Plan areas. The heritage maps included in the 2000 GP will serve as the basis for the maps included in the GP Update. Layers will be updated using exis ng data sources.

5) Kaua‘i’s rich cultural and heritage resources are a major a rac on for both residents and tourists. A renewed interest in Hawaiian values and culture reveals itself in place names, art, fashion, and the increased number of Hawaiian schools for music, language, and dance, all of which contribute to the aloha spirit.

14.5 RESOURCES

State of Hawai’i Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. May 2004. Kaua‘i Island Plan.

County of Kaua‘i. 1990. County of Kaua‘i Historic Resources Inventory and Management Plan.


JULY 2015 88



JULY 2015 89

15.0 NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION 15.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

Kaua’i residents firmly believe that the natural environment provides the founda on for sustainability, which is the top priority in their communi es. During the GP Update community mee ngs, the theme of “nature first” was reiterated over and over. The island’s “natural capital” is seen as its greatest asset, and preserving it for current and future genera ons is of utmost importance. Care for and access to public trust resources (water, beaches, coastal areas, special places) was a par cular theme.

Kaua‘i’s natural resources are boun ful, and include its public lands; above and underground inland waters; ocean waters; coastal areas; non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels and minerals; mountains and valleys; forests and fields; and the flora and fauna that depend on these areas. Natural resources have a cri cal role in the func oning ecosystem. They are equally important for their natural beauty and contribu on to community health and well-being, including recrea on and the economy.

Increases in popula on and visitors create demands and pressures on natural resources. Opinions vary on the degree to which Kaua‘i’s resources are currently managed and how will they be managed in the future. There is overall agreement that Kaua‘i’s natural resources are threatened, and that proper stewardship is an urgent ma er that requires a holis c approach. This is everyone’s kuleana, and includes individuals, businesses, and government taking measures to reduce their ecological footprint and increase efficiencies rather than use more limited resources. It includes devo ng more resources to ensure that na ve ecosystems and organisms are not irreparably harmed, and finding a balance between human use and enjoyment of nature and its preserva on for future genera ons. The concept of malama ‘āina is an appropriate one to capture this intent. Many in the community have also invoked ahupua‘a management as a model that is instruc ve for current and future environmental management. Watershed councils and environmental organiza ons exist throughout the island and are prominent voices in the stewardship and management of water and other resources.

Invasive species pose a huge threat to the environment, threaten our environment, economy, agriculture, human health, and/or quality of life. Invasive species generally reproduce quickly and are able to spread from their ini al intended area.


JULY 2015 90

Much of Kaua‘i’s natural resources are owned and managed by mul ple Federal, State, and local en es. Kaua'i has twenty-four managed reserve, preserve or park areas, shown below:

Kaua'i Reserves Management Alakai Wilderness Preserve DOFAW Halelea Forest Reserve DOFAW Hono O Na Pali Natural Area Reserve DOFAW Kalepa Mountain Forest Reserve DOFAW Keālia Forest Reserve DOFAW Kuia Natural Area Reserve DOFAW Līhu'e-Kōloa Forest Reserve DOFAW Mānā Plains DOFAW Moloa'a Forest Reserve DOFAW Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve DOFAW Nonou Forest Reserve DOFAW Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve DOFAW Wailua Game Management Area DOFAW Hā'ena State Park DOSP Kokee State Park DOSP Na Pali Coast State Wilderness Park DOSP Polihale State Park DOSP Wailua River State Park DOSP Waimea Canyon State Park DOSP Kanaele Preserve TNC Wainiha Preserve TNC Hanalei Na onal Wildlife Refuge USFWS Huleia Na onal Wildlife Refuge USFWS Kīlauea Point Na onal Wildlife Refuge USFWS

All lands - even those that are inaccessible and designated as preserva on lands by the State – need protec on. Erosion, invasive species, air and water pollu on have wide-reaching impacts. Government regula ons include the Special Management Areas (SMA), State Conserva on District, and County Open District. Regula ons under the County’s control can be modified to further protect natural resources.

Some proper es that contain natural resources are privately-owned and subject to be developed. These privately-owned resources are the most vulnerable, especially when owned by people who are land rich and cash poor. There may be a mechanism for inventorying such lands and developing a long-term protec on and stewardship strategy beyond targeted acquisi on. Community members have expressed concern that property owners (par cularly high-profile or wealthy buyers concerned with privacy) try to limit access to public areas such as beaches, trails, and coastal lands. Maintaining adequate access to these areas is a recurring theme of community feedback.

The State of Hawaii plays a major role in managing natural resources on Kaua‘i. The Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) controls and manages the forest reserves, natural area reserves, and state parks. The forested watersheds harbor rare and endangered plant and animal species, and in some areas, the na ve ecosystem remains rela vely intact. The DLNR exercises regulatory authority over land use in


JULY 2015 91

the State Conserva on District, which covers 55 percent of the island’s land area. Anyone wishing to build in the Conserva on District receive approval. DLNR has responsibility of the Public Land Trust, including ceded lands and submerged lands.

Endangered Species

Terrestrial ecosystems have changed significantly since the arrival of Europeans in 1778. Although Kaua‘i’s first se lers cleared much of the low-lying forests for agriculture and dwelling sites, the higher eleva ons were le rela vely undisturbed. Forests con nue to be depleted of sandalwood trees. The introduc on of ca le and goats requires grazing land. The need for fuel, ranching ac vi es, and crop produc on results in deforesta on. Fires ignited by humans destroy na ve forests, especially during dry periods. Coupled with these disturbances are threats to na ve birds, plants, and invertebrates.

About 90% of the na ve Hawaiian plant species can only be found in the Hawaiian archipelago. Kaua’i has the highest number – 495 – of endemic plant species in the Hawaiian Archipelago. Over 140 of them are listed as federally endangered, and of these, 70 are on the verge of ex nc on (U.S. Forest Service, 2011).

Kauaʻi is home to more tropical bird species than any of the other islands. There are over 80 different species which nest on the island and 21 of them are exclusively na ve to Kauaʻi. Several species, in par cular, are endangered and need protec on from predators, invasive species, and habitat destruc on. Examples include the Hawaiian Petrel, Newell’s Shearwater, and Nene. Recent addi ons to endangered species lists suggests that the management of the Alaka‘i Wilderness Preserve is cri cal to protec ng wildlife (Dra Hawai‘i's State Wildlife Ac on Plan, 2015).

Several endangered species of animals find refuge on, or just off of, Kauaʻi’s shores. The Hawaiian Monk Seal and the Hawaiian Hoary Bat are just two of the na ve species on the endangered species list. These animals, as well as three of the seven endangered species of Sea Turtles in the world, make Kauaʻi’s vast stretch of shoreline their home. Endangered Humpback Whales are also found in the waters around Kauaʻi.

Cri cal Habitats

There is approximately 188,500 acres of forest on Kauaʻi, occupying 55% of the island. The na ve 'ohi'a is the predominant forest type with over 109,000 acres or 58% of the forest acreage. Of this forest area, less than half, or approximately 88,000 acres is in forest reserve land. The majority of these reserves, or 64%, are na ve 'ohi'a and koa forests. The great majority occur inland at high eleva ons or on steep topography unsuited to development. In developable, low-lying areas, only sca ered remnants remain. The Alaka‘i Swamp has the largest block of undisturbed na ve forest on the island. The Kōke’e area, on the western side of the island, has wet, na ve 'ohi'a forests at higher eleva ons and dry, scrub koa forests

Puaiohi or Small Kaua‘i thrush – State and Federally Listed Endangered Species


JULY 2015 92

at lower eleva ons. Na ve forests are also found along the pali (cliff) walls in the backs of many valleys. Kauaʻi has over 134,000 acres (39% of the island) of cliffside or pali lands.

Over 36,000 acres of shrubs occur on the island; the dominant species is haole koa with over 13,000 acres. Over 122,000 acres are classified as non-forest with cul vated land and grassland comprising over 64,000 and 34,000 acres, respec vely.

Watersheds and Streams

Watersheds collect rain and condensa on that is funneled into stream beds that either join other stream beds or terminate at the edge of the sea. The presence and severity of erosion can be used as a measure of the quality of a watershed. An islandwide photographic sample (The Mul resource Forest Inventory for Kauaʻi) indicated that 13% (45,100 acres) of the island had slight to moderate erosion and 6% (20,825 acres) had severe erosion. Eighty-four percent of the severely eroded land is in the pali land class. Most of the severely eroded area is in Waimea Canyon and along lower ridges on Kauaʻi's west side. Although many of the steep pali lands are naturally erosive, other areas in the lower Kōke’e area could benefit from watershed rehabilita on efforts.

The 2008 Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aqua c Resources divides Kauaʻi into five regions. The Hanalei region has 32 watersheds. The Līhu‘e region has 12 watersheds. The Kōloa region has 8 watersheds. The Waimea region has 4 watersheds The Kekaha region has 10 watersheds. Priority watersheds for restora on in Kauaʻi include: 1) Nāwiliwili Bay and coastal waters, including the three tributary watersheds of Nāwiliwili, Pū’ali, and Hulē’ia; 2) Waimea Bay and coastal waters, including the tributary watersheds of Waimea, Kapilimao, Waipao, A'akukui, and Mahinauli; and 3) Hanapēpē Bay and coastal waters, including the Hanapēpē River and watershed (State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, 2014).

Nonpoint source pollu on, commonly called polluted runoff (Hawaii’s Implementa on Plan for Polluted Runoff Control, 2000), occurs when rainwater moves on the surface of the earth or through the ground and carrying the pollutants it encounters along the way. This polluted runoff flows to drainage systems and ends up impairing streams and nearshore coastal waters. Significant pollutant types include sediments, nutrients, toxins, floatables, and pathogens. In the simplest terms, nonpoint source pollu on is any pollu on that is not from a par cular, or point, source. The consequences of nonpoint source pollu on include: increased risk of disease from water recrea on, algae blooms, fish kills, destroyed aqua c habitats, and turbid waters. Some polluted runoff is from natural sources, like soil eroding on steep slopes during heavy rain. Most, however, results from people’s ac vi es on the land.

There are 17 impaired inland freshwater bodies and 23 impaired marine/coastal water bodies in Kaua’i (State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, 2014). These numbers have increased significantly from the 1997 data included in the 2000 General Plan. In 1997, there were only four impaired bays and five perennial streams that were targeted for water pollu on controls and management. Several streams are newly listed because the sampling data of conven onal pollutants has increased, but others are included because their quality has decreased.

A key concern is the long-term organiza onal structure for watershed and stream management. Each restora on project must develop and draw upon a network of government and community- based organiza ons. Agencies or organiza ons must step forward to accept responsibility and be funded to coordinate restora on and management over the long term.

Ocean Resources


JULY 2015 93

The most vulnerable resources are those threatened by climate change and sea-level rise. Recommenda ons for improved protec on of these resources are summarized in the 2014 Kauaʻi Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment. The impact of climate change on the land, beaches and oceans could be severe and is a concern (see the Climate Change and Coastal Hazards sec on of this paper for more discussion). The 2014 Kauaʻi Climate Change and Coastal Hazard Assessment reports that nearshore reefs and coastal ecosystems are already under great pressure from overfishing, land-based runoff, and other human impacts. Increasing temperatures, ocean acidifica on, and runoff with changing precipita on pa erns will further destabilize nearshore ecosystems. On Kaua‘i, approximately 70% of beaches are experiencing erosional trends.

Sea-level rise and related impacts such as increasing storm surge heights threaten to alter the physical se ng and impacts for nearshore environments. Fish species that depend on shallow water or inter- dal and sub- dal plant communi es will be at risk of habitat loss. Changing water depths could nega vely affect species types and quan es. Future inunda on of coastal lands with sea-level rise and changing precipita on and runoff pa erns could further degrade coastal water quality, in addi on to the exis ng threats to water quality from nonpoint source pollu on, such as sediment, nutrients, pathogens, oil, toxins, and polluted runoff. Impacts of certain farming prac ces have been hotly debated on Kaua‘i.

To summarize, the major issues in Natural Resource Management and Conserva on include:

• Healthy natural resources are a key to sustainability and resilience. • Na ve flora and fauna are threatened by a myriad of drivers, including habitat loss, invasive

species, and climate change. Development contributes to these drivers, including the development of natural resources.

• Privately owned proper es may have resources that are not protected, or whose resources are difficult to monitor.

• County and State parks are challenged to maintain facili es. • Resource protec on is a shared responsibility and duty. • Sedimenta on from rivers, streams, and other runoff is nega vely impac ng coastal areas. • Beaches are being lost due to coastal erosion and human impacts to sand supply.

15.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Encouraging the forma on of ci zens groups to take responsibility for local natural resources and partnering with the State and non-profits for research purposes can lead to an improved environment, generate locate capacity and awareness, and poten ally lead to funding for more environmental protec on and conserva on ac vi es. Environmental leaders on Kaua’i include:

• The Nature Conservancy manages two cri cal habitat areas on Kaua'i via management agreements with the landowner: the Kanaele Bog and Wainiha Preserve.

• Na onal Tropical Botanical Garden is dedicated to preserving tropical plant diversity and stemming this de of ex nc on - through plant explora on, propaga on, habitat restora on, scien fic research, and educa on. NTBG's gardens and preserves are safe havens for at-risk species that otherwise might disappear forever.

• The Kauaʻi Invasive Species Commi ee (KISC) is a voluntary partnership of government, private and non-profit organiza ons, and concerned individuals working to prevent, control, or eliminate the most threatening invasive plant and animal species in order to preserve Kauaʻi’s na ve biodiversity and minimize adverse ecological, economic and social impacts.


JULY 2015 94

• The Kauaʻi Endangered Seabird Recovery Project (KESRP) is a Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) project, administered through the Pacific Studies Co-opera ve Unit of the University of Hawaiʻi. Formed in 2006, the project focuses on the Newell’s Shearwater, Hawaiian Petrel and Band-rumped Storm-Petrel. KESRP iden fies the breeding distribu on of these rare seabirds, monitors their breeding colonies, undertakes research projects to understand their life histories and the various threats which they face, and works with partner projects and organiza ons to ensure their long-term conserva on.

• Mālama Hulē‘ia is a voluntary non-profit organiza on dedicated to improving key parts of the Nāwiliwili Bay Watershed on Kaua‘i by elimina ng the red mangrove - an alien and highly invasive plant species. Over the last 50 years, the red mangrove has been changing na ve wildlife habitats in and along the Hulē‘ia River and destroying the ‘Alekoko Fish Pond.

• The Surfrider Founda on, Kaua‘i Chapter, is a non-profit environmental organiza on dedicated to the protec on and enjoyment of the world’s oceans, waves and beaches for all people, through conserva on, ac vism, research and educa on.

• The Kaua‘i Watershed Alliance partners (KWA) focus on protec ng the uppermost watershed areas on Kaua’i from invasive alien plants, animals, and other threats. The Nature Conservancy is coordina ng the implementa on of an overall management strategy for the KWA to protect the 144,004 acres of partnership lands.

• Hanalei Watershed Hui is a non-profit environmental organiza on that strives to care for the Ahupua’a of Hanalei, Wai‘oli, Waipā, and Waikoko. They are guided by Hawaiian and other principles of sustainability and stewardship, integrity and balance, coopera on and aloha, cultural equity and mutual respect.

• The Kauaʻi Invasive Species Commi ee (KISC) is a voluntary partnership of government, private and non-profit organiza ons, and concerned individuals working to prevent, control, or eliminate the most threatening invasive plant and animal species in order to preserve Kauaʻi’s na ve biodiversity and minimize adverse ecological, economic and social impacts.

• Malama Mahaulepu is working to preserve, for future genera ons, the irreplaceable natural and cultural resources of Maha`ulepu.

• Sierra Club’s mission is to explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; prac ce and promote the responsible use of the earth’s ecosystems and resources; educate and enlist humanity to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment; and to use all lawful means to carry out these objec ves.

• Kaua‘i Forest Bird Recovery Project aims to promote knowledge, apprecia on, and conserva on of Kaua‘i’s na ve forest birds. Its efforts focus primarily on three federally endangered species: the Puaiohi, ‘Akikiki, and ‘Akeke‘e, with the goal of facilita ng recovery of their popula ons in the wild.

The Department of Land and Natural Resources supports the forma on of local groups to monitor environmental health and build community awareness. Makai Watch Groups are now ac ve in Hanalei and Hā‘ena. The State, working with the University and other non-profits, like the Nature Conservancy of Hawai‘i, uses Kaua‘i as a tes ng ground for environmental ac on. For example, the Aqua c Invasive Species Response Team is working on a method to eliminate snowflake coral from the pier at Kaua‘i’s Port Allen.


JULY 2015 95

Regula ons already exist to help manage and conserve natural resources. They include the Special Management Areas (SMA), State Conserva on District, and County Open District. The SMA program helps ensure that permi ed uses and ac vi es are designed and carried out in compliance with the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) program objec ves and policies as set forth in Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes. The SMA Permit system administered by the County regulates development within a geographically defined boundary that extends from the shoreline inland. Within each county, SMA boundaries may range from about 100 yards to several miles inland from the shoreline.

The County’s Open District was established to ensure an adequate amount of open lands is provided for the recrea onal and aesthe c needs of the community and to provide for the effec ve func oning of land, air, water, plant and animal systems or communi es. It is intended to preserve, maintain or improve the essen al characteris cs of land and water areas that are: (1) of significant value to the public as scenic or recrea onal resources; (2) important to the overall structure and organiza on of urban areas and which provide accessible and usable open areas for recrea onal and aesthe c purposes; (3) necessary to insulate or buffer the public and places of residence from undesirable environmental factors caused by, or related to, par cular uses such as noise, dust, and visually offensive elements.

The State Conserva on District is comprised primarily of lands in exis ng forest and water reserve zones and includes areas necessary for protec ng watersheds and water sources, scenic and historic areas, parks, wilderness, open space, recrea onal areas, habitats of endemic plants, fish and wildlife, and all submerged lands seaward of the shoreline. The Conserva on District is administrated by the State Board of Land and Natural Resources and uses are governed by rules promulgated by the State Department of Land and Natural Resources.

While these regulatory programs provide a significant measure of protec on, they can be complemented and strengthened by adop ng smart growth policies that seek to contain urban development within compact, walkable town cores. Urban edge boundaries and zoning requirements can also be implemented to direct the extent and character of development.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Natural Resource Management and Conserva on include:

• Several regulatory mechanisms are in place to protect or conserve natural resources. • Many local groups are working as environmental stewards.


JULY 2015 96

15.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION

• The 2000 GP contains an extensive sec on tled “Caring for Land, Water and Culture”. Several sub-sec ons, including “Watersheds, Streams and Water Quality”, “Coastal Lands”, and “Scenic Views” remain largely current and relevant today.

• The 2000 GP recommended revising the CZO to be er protect natural resources by revising the Drainage Way Constraint District and/or crea ng an overlay zone for streams, wetlands, and flood plains. The policies governing Natural Resource Management and Conserva on are mostly intact.


Work on natural resource management to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Meet with SMA regulators to determine whether addi onal direc on or recommenda ons in the GP would support resource protec on.

2) Introduce data and informa on from the climate change study conducted for the GP Update. 3) Extract appropriate policy material from recent master planning for the County parks. 4) Update Table 3-1: Water Bodies with Impaired Water Quality, Island of Kaua’i, 1997 (in the 2000

GP) with currently available data from the Hawaii Department of Health 2014 State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring And Assessment Report: Integrated Report to the U.S. Environmental Protec on Agency and the U.S. Congress Pursuant to §303(d) and §305(b), Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117).

5) Develop current data and maps on drainage issues. However, this is outside the scope of the GP Update.

6) During community workshops, seek input on non-profit organiza ons on natural resource protec on, and determine how and whether these organiza ons can play a larger role in implemen ng resource protec on ac ons in the updated GP.

7) Add descrip ons of the role of the County, State and Federal Government in resource protec on.


JULY 2015 97

15.5 RESOURCES

Buck, Michael G., Bream Jeanine M., Stormont, William T. United State Department of Agriculture, Forest Services. August 1988. The Mul resource Forest Inventory for Kaua‘i. Resource Bulle n PNW-RB-156.

Cannarella, R.J. 2010. Statewide Assessment of Forest Condi ons and Resource Strategy. Honolulu, HI: Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. 271 p. h p://dlnr.hawaii.gov/forestry/ info/fap/. (17 March 2014).

Kaua‘i Watershed Alliance. April 2005. Kaua‘i Watershed Alliance Management Plan.

State of Hawai‘i Department of Health. 2014. Dra State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report: Integrated Report to the U.S. Environmental Protec on Agency and the U.S. Congress Pursuant to §303(d) and §305(b), Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117).

State of Hawai‘i, Department of Health. July 2000. Hawaii’s Implementa on Plan for Polluted Runoff Control.

State of Hawai‘I Department of Land and Natural Resources. October 1, 2015. Hawai‘i’s State Wildlife Ac on Plan. Dra for Public Review.

State of Hawai’i, Department of Land and Natural Resources. The Rain Follows the Forest (DLNR State Watershed Ini a ve) h p://dlnr.hawaii.gov/rain/

State of Hawaii Division of Aqua c Resources and Bishop Museum. 2008. Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds & Their Aqua c Resources.

State of Hawai’i Office of Planning. July 2013. Hawai‘i Ocean Resources Management Plan.

Stein Susan M., Carr, Mary A., Liknes, Greg C., and Comas, Sara J. USDA Forest Service. August 2014. Islands on the Edge: Housing Development and Other Threats to America’s Pacific and Caribbean Island Forests. General Technical Report NRS-137

U.S. Forest Service. 2011. FHP [Forest Health Program] in Hawaii. Hilo, HI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Sta on, State and Private Forestry. h p://www.fs.fed.us/r5/spf/ p/hawaii/index.shtml. (6 June 2011).


JULY 2015 98



JULY 2015 99

16.0 PARKS AND RECREATION 16.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

The County of Kaua‘i has an extensive park system that includes 85 park proper es. They range in size from the small 0.2-acre Horner Park to the an cipated 138-acre Ahukini Coastal Park and are spread all over the island. In addi on to the park lands, the County maintains Kaua‘i’s public 18-hole Wailuā Golf Course and two cultural preserves – Ka Ulu A Paoa and Ke Aku A Laka in Hā‘ena and Kaneiolouma in Po‘ipū.

Kauaʻi is also fortunate to have State parks, the Na Ala Hele Trails, and federally protected areas, such as the Kīlauea Point Na onal Refuge. The Kōke‘e and Waimea Canyon State Parks are adjoining parks located on the west side of Kauaʻi. Officially established in 1952, the parks occupy 6,182.4 acres of land. Their combined acreage is approximately 1.75 percent of the total land area on the island, and 40 percent of the State Parks acreage on Kauaʻi. The two parks have significant cultural, historic, natural and scenic resources, and thus, are very popular. These Parks are called out because the challenges they face are recently documented (the Kōke‘e and Waimea Canyon State Parks Master Plan was completed in 2014) and are representa ve of maintenance and capacity issues other parks on Kaua‘i elsewhere.

Given that people are living longer, the recrea on needs of seniors will increase over me; and yet, planning to meet the needs of youth remains important because youth have more limited leisure-

me choices. The County’s Department of Parks and Recrea on con nues to work on providing the programming and facili es to meet the diversity of recrea onal needs. A survey conducted as part of the 2013 parks and recrea on planning process revealed community priori es, which are illustrated in the graph at right.

The pace of park improvements may not be keeping up with demand. The Department of Parks and Recrea on survey also found that residents already perceive that the biggest challenges facing County parks are maintenance, lack of ameni es, and lack of facili es desired by users. The diversity of facili es and programs offered, coupled with the distance between proper es and their varied sizes

Source: 2013 Parks and Recrea on Master Plan

SURVEY QUESTION 13: THE COUNTY IS ESTABLISHING A SERIES OF PRIORITIES TO DIRECT FUTURE DEPARTMENT ACTIONS. HOW IMPORTANT OR UNIMPORTANT ARE EACH OF THE FOLLOWING?


JULY 2015 100

means that staff spend a lot of me driving from facility to facility and a great variety of equipment is needed to maintain the proper es.

From a maintenance and resource perspec ve, it is more efficient to manage large parks, or “super parks”, as opposed to smaller parks or gathering places. However, smaller neighborhood parks play an important role in fostering healthy communi es. Neighborhood parks can o en be reached by foot or bicycle and, thus, contribute to a healthy lifestyle and cleaner environment. Such parks or local gathering places also contribute to healthy communi es – they facilitate neighbor interac on and par cipa on in community decision-making. Such places, also called “civic spaces,” are where people can get to know one another and discuss neighborhood ma ers. A rac ve communi es generally have a diversity of parks – large and small – that meet the needs of its people.

The desire for addi onal park facili es will need to be balanced with preserving the intent of the Open district. As an example of how this balance can be met, the CZO was amended in 2012 to exclude public shared use paths greater than 10 feet in width from the lot coverage provision. In the case of shared use paths wider than 10 feet, the Planning Director’s approval is required to exceed the standard.

Accessibility to parks is a key priority that relates to community health and social equity. Parks should be accessible for people of all ages and abili es, including persons with disabili es. A pedestrian and bicycle network that connects parks with town centers and complies with ADA requirements is key to accomplishing this. When private lands are involved, it can be difficult to nego ate adequate access to shoreline and inland recrea onal areas. Adequate access means (at minimum) providing parking and means for the general public to access the area on foot.

To summarize, the major issues in Parks and Recrea on include:

• The State and County Parks are heavily used and require more maintenance and facility upgrades than they are currently receiving. Many exis ng park facili es require improvement.

• Improving and maintaining exis ng park facili es is more important than building new facili es. • Facili es and programs need to accommodate a popula on that is aging and living longer. • The County needs both small and large parks to accommodate the diversity of user needs. • Certain zoning regula ons define how future parks produc on or improvement can be

accomplished.

16.2 OPPORTUNITIES

In 2006, Kaua‘i voters approved a Charter amendment that created the Department of Parks and Recrea on. As a result there is now greater capacity to manage and improve the parks system and facili es.

The County’s Department of Parks and Recrea on developed and adopted its Master Plan in 2013. The Plan is aligned with the 1978 Parks and Recrea on Master Plan, 2000 General Plan, and 2009 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recrea on Plan. It contains four primary goals that build on previous planning work and address the needs of current and future park and open space users. These are listed on the following page.


JULY 2015 101

There are programs that encourage the community to par cipate in crea ng and helping maintain parks. These include: the County’s community-based program for park improvements called Ho‘olokahi, “Adopt-a-Park”, and partnerships with other local departments or schools and non-profits. Other mechanisms for collabora ng can be explored.

Some mes the Department may collect a fee for a facility’s use. Adjus ng fees and improving the deposit program to be er match public demand and expenses would help to recapture a por on of the costs for facility maintenance and upkeep.

While the preserva on and public access to natural and cultural resources has always been cri cal, Kauaʻi has a new tool with which to implement its goals. The Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preserva on Fund (Fund), was established in 2002. The Fund receives a minimum of 0.5% of Kaua‘i’s annual cer fied real property taxes. Ordinance No. 936, enacted in 2012, increased the set aside to 1.5% of real property taxes. The Fund may be used to acquire land or property en tlements for: public outdoor recrea on and educa on; preserva on of historic or culturally important land areas or sites; protec on of significant habitats or ecosystems; preserving forests, beaches, coastal areas and agricultural lands; conserving land to reduce erosion, floods, landslides and runoff; improving or acquiring public access for all people to public land and open space; and, conserving land for scenic views. Shared use paths – one of the top priori es iden fied in the Parks and Recrea on master planning process – could be targeted for acquisi on (or extension / improvement) using the Public Access Fund.

The Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preserva on Fund Commission (aka “Open Space Commission”) was formed in 2004 to solicit public input and work with the Planning Department to develop an annual list of priority projects to be considered for funding. Other funding opportuni es include Hawai‘i’s Legacy Land Conserva on Program and the Land and Water Conserva on Fund administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior.

The 2014 Dra Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study suggests that the park dedica on fee assessed at the me of subdivision approval is too low and does not capture the true costs of facili es and land needed to meet the requirements of a growing popula on. The Needs Assessment Study recommends that the park dedica on fee be replaced with a Park Land and Facili es Impact Fee.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Parks and Recrea on include:

• The Public Access Fund and Parks Trust provide funds for acquisi on, access and improvements of land beyond the annual County budget.

• User fees can be adjusted to be er reflect costs of maintenance, or be ins tuted to generate funds for improvements.

• Research on impact fees reveals that the park dedica on fee could be revised and updated.

Goals of the 2013 Parks and Recrea on Master Plan 1. Parks and Recrea on Facili es – to provide outstanding support and services for a variety of park and recrea on experiences; 2. Physical and Cultural Resources – to ensure stewardship of the natural, historic, and cultural environments for long-term recrea onal use and enjoyment; 3. Recrea on Programs – to provide recrea on programs that reflect the interests on Kaua‘i ci zens and improve their quality of life and well-being; and, 4. Planning, Coordina on, and Implementa on - to promote implementa on of the Master Plan.


JULY 2015 102

• Partnerships with other en es can expand the Department of Parks and Recrea on’s ability to keep facili es clean and func oning properly, as well as ins ll a sense of ownership in the contribu ng public.

16.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED PARKS AND RECREATION

• The Parks and Recrea on sec on in Chapter 8 of the 2000 GP addresses County parks. State parks are addressed in greater detail in Chapter 3 tled “Caring for Land, Water and Culture” and Chapter 4 “Developing Jobs and Businesses” (primarily within the “Visitor Impacts on Parks and Natural Resources” sub-heading).

• The 2000 GP recognized the regulatory constraints that parks face in certain zoning districts. The 2000 GP recommended simplifying the zoning and permi ng procedures for the opera on of outdoor recrea on ac vi es on private lands. It also suggested clarifying the defini on of outdoor recrea on to include, but not be limited to, bicycle and horseback riding, hiking, off-road sightseeing, fishing, tent-camping, and other such uses, which are dependent on open lands. These recommenda ons remain valid, but have not yet been ini ated.

• The 2000 GP recommended amending the State Land Use District boundaries to remove Wailuā Golf Course and Kukuiolono Park from the Conserva on District and place them in either the Urban or the Agriculture District. The Conserva on District is inappropriate zoning for ac vely-used recrea on facili es that serve urban communi es. In addi on, the Conserva on District Rules prohibit golf courses, which makes it extremely difficult and costly to carry out planned improvements. It is recommended that a strip of land along the Wailuā beach be retained in the Conserva on District, consistent with other coastal areas through the Island. This task has not yet been ini ated.


Work on parks and recrea on to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) The data within the 2000 GP pertaining to exis ng park sizes, categories and loca ons can be updated with the recently completed Parks Master Plan.

2) The GP could consider social equity issues. Do all communi es have access to parks with a range of ac vi es for children and the elderly?

3) Community centers may be considered for mul ple purposes. For example, more centers with cer fied kitchens can serve as incubators. Community centers could also be used as satellite educa onal centers.

4) Update Table 8-9: County Parks, by District and Type from the 2000 GP with data from the 2013 Parks and Recrea on Master Plan.

5) Discuss the goals and objec ves in the Parks and Recrea on Master Plan with the CAC, Planning Department and community.

6) The Master Plan includes district-specific priori es and implementa on me frames that can serve as the basis for addi onal discussion regarding public health and mul modal land transporta on ini a ves.

7) Be er understand the regulatory constraints that face park produc on and improvement. 8) The GP planning process can promote a discussion that goes beyond “how to maintain” parks, to

“what kinds of places help create vibrant, healthy communi es?”

16.5 RESOURCES

County of Kaua‘i Department of Parks & Recrea on. 2013. Kaua‘i Parks & Recrea on Master Plan.


JULY 2015 103

17.0 GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AND FISCAL MANAGEMENT 17.1 DEFINING THE ISSUES

The County’s tax base is small compared to its land mass. The limited road network and distances between communi es means that providing public services is expensive. Visitors need almost all the same services that residents receive. The government staff is already stretched thin, and yet the Island’s popula on grows and their needs and expecta ons con nue to increase. As a world-class tourist des na on, Kaua‘i is expected to have not only beau ful scenery, but the cleanest public facili es and most modern and a rac ve ameni es. To do this requires working with the State, Federal en es and other coun es.

While Kaua‘i is managing its responsibili es, and con nues to introduce new mechanisms that promote accountability and transparency, new regula ons and repor ng requirements are adding to the workload. Certain plans, as documented in this Paper, are outdated. Informa on and data gaps make decision-making difficult. Un l 2002, Kaua‘i County did not have a GIS database to assist in planning and relied on paper maps, but such systems, albeit useful, require regular upda ng. The collec ve proposed ac ons contained within the recently prepared technical reports and planning documents are likely more than the County (and its tax base) can afford or manage within the next 20 years.

To summarize, the major issues in Government Opera ons and Fiscal Management include:

• The GP planning process will need to priori ze ac ons because the government staff and resources are limited. Several recommended ac ons included in the 2000 GP have not yet been implemented.

• The technical reports prepared to date, already contain more recommenda ons than the government may be able to reasonably implement.

• Residents seek transparency in government, including but not limited to accessible performance measures.

17.2 OPPORTUNITIES

Systems that facilitate opera ons and fiscal management are in place. These include a streamlined government structure, management policies, and processes that assist with developing opera ng funds and capital improvement planning. Kaua‘i has embraced a transparent repor ng system and performance measures with the assistance of the Kauaʻi Planning and Ac on Alliance. Measuring What Ma ers for Kauaʻi includes cri cal community indicators that, in turn, facilitate decisions about the economy and the `aina. It includes qualita ve and quan ta ve informa on

Holo Holo 2020: A plan that focuses on engaging organiza ons, businesses, residents and visitors to be part of crea ng an island that is sustainable, values our na ve culture, has a thriving and healthy economy, cares for all keiki to kupuna, and has a responsibility and user-friendly local government.


JULY 2015 104

on significant aspects of Kauaʻi to assess the current status and to iden fy trends over me. For the GP Update, they can be helpful in determining if the island is moving in desired direc ons. And if not, the indicators help to suggest where changes in policies, programs or resource alloca ons are needed to correct the course. In 2012, KPAA examined 49 indicators to assess the status of:

1. Economic and Business Climate 2. Public Educa on 3. Community Health and Well-Being 4. Civic Engagement 5. Natural Environment 6. Land Use and Rural Character 7. Culture and Arts

These progress reports are a step in the right direc on, and more can be done to improve how the County government communicates with the public and uses data in its decision-making processes.

The Planning Department has developed a systema c method to work with other departments to organize capital improvement and service priori es by providing guidance on se ng priori es. This has helped establish the basis for the six-year Capital Improvement Program and County appropria ons. The Planning Department’s efforts to evaluate departmental proposals and align them with the GP prior to submission to County Council has contributed to a more orderly and comprehensive decision-making. A more robust grant and founda on seeking effort, plus more partnerships with other governmental agencies will supplement the County’s budget.

Hawaii’s impact fee legisla on (Chapter 46, Part VIII of Hawaii Revised Statues Sec on 46-141 through 148 adopted in 1992) authorizes coun es to adopt impact fees for any “types of public facility capital improvements specifically iden fied in a county comprehensive plan or a facility needs assessment study”. Impact fees can be ins tuted to cover some of the costs of increasing public infrastructure and facility capacity in an cipa on of popula on growth. According to the Dra Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study, “Essen ally, impact fees require that each developer of a new residen al or commercial project pay its pro-rata share of the cost of new infrastructure facili es required to serve that development.” The study recommends assessing uniform county-wide fees for transporta on, parks (park and facili es or just facili es), fire, police and solid waste.

Depending on the type of land use – single family, mul -family, hotel/motel, commercial, industrial – the one- me fees range from approximately $8,000 to $20,500 per unit (i.e., dwelling, room, or 1,000 square feet) and could be collected at the building permit (or cer ficate of occupancy) stage. If such fees are adopted, the County would need to develop the administra ve capacity to collect, account for, expend in a mely manner, and update regularly the fees. In addi on to deciding whether to recommend the adop on of impact fees in the GP, other considera ons will be necessary. For example, impact fees may be perceived as increasing the cost of living on Kaua‘i.

To summarize, the major opportuni es in Government Opera ons and Fiscal Management include:

• Under the theme of Kauaʻi Kākou, the public sector, private sector and non-profits can assist with implementa on of the GP ac ons.

• Methods to be er document GP implementa on progress can be included in the GP. Develop indicators of progress where they do not exist.

• Impact fees may be called for to assist with infrastructure capacity in an cipa on of popula on growth.


JULY 2015 105

17.3 HOW THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN TREATED GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AND FISCAL MANAGEMENT

• The Government Opera ons and Fiscal Management topic will require significant a en on because the 2000 GP text is quite limited. It was limited because of “Implementa on”, public facility plans, and financing, the produc on of development plans for communi es, and what the Planning Department’s role is in GP implementa on, necessary zone changes, and GP monitoring and review.

• A role that the private sector or non-profits can play in helping implement par cular components of the GP was not addressed in 2000 GP. As directed by the 2000 GP, the Planning Department has begun collabora ng with community organiza ons to develop indicators and benchmarks to measure progress rela ve to the GP and to other community goals, as evidenced by KPAA Annual Community Indicators Report, Complete Streets Indicators Report, and collabora ve work with the CHII.

• The Mayor’s various ini a ves toward more transparency and improved governance are readily available and can be incorporated into the updated GP.


Work on government opera ons and fiscal management to be conducted by the GP Team includes:

1) Specify ac ons the government can take to implement the recommenda ons contained in the GP. 2) Iden fy how the government can work more effec vely with the State to accomplish ac ons

recommended in the GP. 3) Consider technological advancements and best design prac ces that offer cost-effec ve

opportuni es for implementa on of GP ac ons. 4) Discuss public / private/ non-profit partnerships to implement ac ons in the General Plan and to

increase par cipatory governance and Kaua‘i’s self-sufficiency. 5) Consider a policy on impact fees and gather community feedback on it.

17.5 RESOURCES

County of Kauaʻi. July 2013. Kaua‘i’s Community Health Needs Assessment

Holo Holo 2020. Annual Report 2013-2014, County of Kaua‘i.

Kaua‘i Planning and Ac on Alliance. January 2014. Measuring What Ma ers for Kaua‘i: Community Indicators Report 2014.

Group 70 Interna onal. August 1, 2014. County of Kaua‘i, Infrastructure & Public Facili es Needs Assessment Study (Dra ).


JULY 2015 106



JULY 2015 107

18.0 OVERARCHING THEMES The policy areas listed in this paper do not exist in isola on. They are inherently linked to one another. The General Plan includes all of these policy areas precisely because they are related. Ac ons in one policy area impact other policy areas. This paper a empts to capture the complexity of these links. The GP planning process will bring greater clarity to these issues, acknowledge the tension that some mes exists among policy areas, and iden fy ac ons that can lead to the realiza on of the Vision for Kaua‘i.

Below is a summary of the overarching themes that emerged from the review of policy areas. These themes reflect what has been heard from the public, County staff, and CAC to date, as well as the informa on contained in the technical reports and other planning documents.

KAUA‘I KĀKOU: SUSTAINABILITY AND STEWARDSHIP

Kaua‘i has a finite ecological and financial carrying capacity. That is, its environmental systems (resources used and waste generated) and tax base (ability of the tax base to finance improvements) are not unlimited. Thus, they may limit or set direc ons for future growth. The General Plan will be governed by the overarching theme of Kauaʻi Kākou: We’re moving forward together to collec vely plan for a more sustainable Kauaʻi, in the spirit of malama ‘āina (stewardship of the land). Coupled with the value of “Lōkahi”, or collabora on and teamwork, “Kākou” promotes synergy when developing solu ons and alterna ves. A corollary to this is transparency and accountability star ng with a honest look of where Kaua‘i is in achieving the Vision laid out in the 2000 GP. The GP Update can provide a vision and tools for allowing for growth, posi ve change, and vibrancy within the context of preserving the rural and historic character and natural resources for today’s popula on and future genera ons. Achieving a more healthy and resilient way of living involves the collec ve stewardship of resources.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT

Infrastructure systems - water, sewer, solid waste, roads- are close to or exceeding exis ng capacity. Unless expanded or improved, these infrastructure systems will limit development, job opportuni es, and housing growth. Given Kaua‘i’s commitment to sustainable development, alterna ves such as green infrastructure (systems and prac ces that use or mimic natural processes to manage wastewater and stormwater), complete streets design, and decentralized/distributed systems for electricity, water, wastewater treatment, and other services may be viable compared to tradi onal methods of providing such services. The extension of water and sewer lines o en results in new development in a linear manner along the line; whereas, decentralized systems and green infrastructure can provide service in very specific areas. Regardless of how services are provided, decisions regarding growth and where growth occurs, including the infrastructure required by growth, must be directed by the GP, and not the availability or unavailability of infrastructure.

DISASTER-RESILIENT ASSETS

Kaua‘i’s physical assets include components of the built and natural environment without which the en re island would suffer. Physical assets can be assessed in terms of their vulnerability to climate change and the like. Kaua‘i has approximately 90 miles of coastline and 60 beaches, with more beach shoreline than any other Hawaiian island. Flooding and related hazards will be exacerbated by climate change and sea-level rise. Without ac ons that result in greater resiliency and the ability to adapt to exis ng and future hazards, the natural and built


JULY 2015 108

environment are and will both be threatened. Roads and infrastructure close to the shore, including Kaua‘i’s landmark beaches, will be affected. Climate change and sea-level rise will nega vely impact Kaua‘i’s major industries - agriculture and tourism. Land uses and design along the coast and some mauka areas will need policies for protec on.

FUTURE USES OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS

A large amount of land is zoned for agricultural purposes at a me when the industry is in transi on. This includes 144,000 acres in the State Land Use Agricultural District, within which 80,000 acres, or 41%, are located in the 2000 General Plan Agricultural District. Concern regarding GMO-type crops and availability of water for irriga on purposes have opened discussions on what kinds of agricultural uses are needed and where. “What to do with agricultural lands” is a food security and resilience issue. Pressure to open lands for housing, as well as the desire to maintain open spaces, a workforce familiar with farming prac ces, and interest in locally produced food for both local consump on and export, may support growth boundaries and the maintenance of agricultural lands.

COST OF LIVING

The cost of living con nues to increase. Housing costs are extremely high, and the pace of produc on of affordable housing is inadequate to serve the need. In February 2015 the Honolulu Star-Adver ser reported that the median sale price for single-family houses on Kaua‘i was $730,000. Sixty percent of the housing inventory is affordable to less than 25% of residents, contribu ng to the concern that parts of Kaua‘i are becoming places for only the wealthy. According to HUD income limits, the majority of the exis ng housing supply can only be afforded by households earning over 180% of the average median income. Kaua‘i households spend an average of 62% of their income on housing and transporta on. Kaua‘i’s u lity rates, especially electricity, are some of the highest in the United States. Kaua‘i residents are crea vely managing the high cost of living by supplemen ng groceries with backyard food produc on, recycling, bartering, second and third jobs, bicycling/car-pooling to work, and turning living rooms into bedrooms for long-term guests and extended family. However, there is evidence that these solu ons aren’t enough. The number of homeless individuals and families is increasing. Youth are leaving rural communi es or the Island to find be er opportuni es, leading to a deteriora on in the community fabric. There are certain contribu ng factors, like shipping costs, that Kaua‘i cannot control; but opportuni es for the public/private/non-profit sector produc on and maintenance of affordable housing and reduc on of transporta on costs (the other large household cost) are available.

NEED FOR A MORE DIVERSE AND VIBRANT ECONOMY

Both the exis ng 2000 General Plan and in the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2010) for Kaua‘i iden fy the need to encourage diverse economic growth opportuni es that will provide living-wage employment to Kaua‘i residents. This includes iden fying convergences between smaller economic clusters with high growth poten al, suppor ng entrepreneurs, small businesses, and increasing economic opportunity for all ages. By implemen ng policies and programs that meet shared needs with growth clusters, the GP has an opportunity to strengthen the island’s economic base, and therefore also strengthen the County’s ability to implement the GP vision.


JULY 2015 109

PUBLIC, PRIVATE AND NON-PROFIT SECTORS PULLING TOGETHER IN THE SAME DIRECTION

Many non-profit organiza ons and ci zen groups are commi ed to Kaua‘i’s improvement over me. The 2000 General Plan focused predominantly on government services and ac ons paid for with tax revenue. Given the independent nature of Kaua‘i’s residents and desire for greater self-sufficiency, the energy of exis ng non-governmental en es can be harnessed to implement ac ons proposed in the General Plan. An op on worth examining, given the limita ons of the exis ng tax base and the GP Update’s over-arching theme of Kaua‘i Kākou, involves more County partnerships with non-profits and the private sector, as well as fee for service programs and priva za on of services for more inclusive stewardship.

VIBRANT, WALKABLE TOWNS AND HEALTHY COMMUNITIES

Kaua‘i’s historic, walkable towns surrounded by open spaces are the backbone of future development. They not only draw visitors, but serve as gathering places for residents. The idea is to preserve and improve the exis ng urban fabric with appropriate infill and age-friendly public spaces to promote safe and pleasant mul -genera onal communi es. Complete streets are needed such that people can walk and bike to and within town centers. Mixed-use, dense communi es where people shop, live affordably, work and play contribute to healthy communi es.


JULY 2015 110

SUMMARY

The table below shows how the overarching themes capture the various policy areas in the GP contract.

Overarching Themes Policy Areas 1. SUSTAINABILITY AND STEWARDSHIP:

How to protect the environment and quality of life for today’s popula on and future genera ons?

• Sustainable Kaua‘i • Land Uses & Growth Management • Tourism • Economic Development • all the rest!

2. INFRASTRUCTURE AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT: Infrastructure systems are close to or exceeding exis ng capacity, thus limi ng development and, in turn, job growth.

• Infrastructure & Services • Land Uses & Growth Management • Public Health • Renewable Energy • Economic Development

3. DISASTER-RESILIENT ASSETS: The impact of sea-level rise and climate change on agriculture, tourism, and infrastructure.

• Economic Development • Climate Change & Hazards • Natural Resource Management • Cultural & Heritage Resources • Parks & Recrea on

4. AGRICULTURAL LANDS: How much, whether to designate, how to protect?

• Agricultural Lands • Open Space & Access • Affordable Housing • Cultural & Heritage Resources • Public Health • Economic Development

5. COST OF LIVING: Maintain / produce affordable housing and reduce transporta on costs.

• Affordable Housing • Mul modal Transporta on • Government Opera ons &

Financing • Coordina on with the State • Coordina on with DHHL

6. NEED FOR MORE JOBS AND A DIVERSE ECONOMY: How to diversify?

• Economic Development • Infrastructure • Mul modal Transporta on

7. KAUA‘I KĀKOU: PUBLIC, PRIVATE AND NON-PROFIT SECTORS PULLING TOGETHER IN THE SAME DIRECTION: How to harness the energy of exis ng non-governmental en es as a means of implemen ng GP ac ons.

• Government Opera ons & Financing

• Coordina on with the State

8. VIBRANT, WALKABLE TOWNS AND HEALTHY COMMUNITIES How to maintain and improve the compact urban fabric?

• Sustainable Kauaʻi • Land Uses & Growth Management • Public Health

ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES - Plan...

Documents

Transcript of ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES - Plan...